Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37538785›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in toxicology2023

Innovative tools and methods for toxicity testing within PARC work package 5 on hazard assessment.

Thalia De Castelbajac, Kiara Aiello, Celia Garcia Arenas, Terje Svingen, Louise Ramhøj, Daniel Zalko, Robert Barouki, Tamara Vanhaecke, Vera Rogiers, Marc Audebert and 8 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in toxicology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Thalia De CastelbajacFrench Agency for Food Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety, Maisons-Alfort, France.
Kiara AielloGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany.
Celia Garcia ArenasGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany.
Terje SvingenNational Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs Lyngby, Denmark.
Louise RamhøjNational Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs Lyngby, Denmark.
Daniel ZalkoINRAE, Toxalim Research Centre in Food Toxicology, Université de Toulouse, Toulouse, France.
Robert BaroukiUniversité Paris Cité, Inserm unit 1124, Paris, France.
Tamara VanhaeckeDepartment In Vitro Toxicology and Dermato-Cosmetology (IVTD) at the Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussels, Belgium.
Vera RogiersDepartment In Vitro Toxicology and Dermato-Cosmetology (IVTD) at the Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussels, Belgium.
Marc AudebertINRAE, Toxalim Research Centre in Food Toxicology, Université de Toulouse, Toulouse, France.
Michael OelgeschlaegerGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany.
Albert BraeuningGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany.
Etienne BlancUniversité Paris Cité, Inserm unit 1124, Paris, France.
Tamara TalHelmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Leipzig, Germany.
Joëlle RüeggDepartment of Organismal Biology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Ellen FritscheLeibniz Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Philip Marx-StoeltingGerman Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Berlin, Germany.
Gilles RivièreFrench Agency for Food Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety, Maisons-Alfort, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

New approach methodologies (NAMs) have the potential to become a major component of regulatory risk assessment, however, their actual implementation is challenging. The European Partnership for the Assessment of Risks from Chemicals (PARC) was designed to address many of the challenges that exist for the development and implementation of NAMs in modern chemical risk assessment. PARC's proximity to national and European regulatory agencies is envisioned to ensure that all the research and innovation projects that are initiated within PARC agree with actual regulatory needs. One of the main aims of PARC is to develop innovative methodologies that will directly aid chemical hazard identification, risk assessment, and regulation/policy. This will facilitate the development of NAMs for use in risk assessment, as well as the transition from an endpoint-based animal testing strategy to a more mechanistic-based NAMs testing strategy, as foreseen by the Tox21 and the EU Chemical's Strategy for Sustainability. This work falls under work package 5 (WP5) of the PARC initiative. There are three different tasks within WP5, and this paper is a general overview of the five main projects in the Task 5.2 '

Indexed as

hazard assessmenthuman healthNAMsNGRAPARC

Identifiers

PMID37538785
PMCPMC10395075

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.