ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2023
Guidance on protocol development for EFSA generic scientific assessments.
Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- Protocols for the development of the guidance on the risk assessment of PPP to non-target arthropods, in-soil organisms and non-target terrestrial plants.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026Article
- Scientific Opinion on waiving of the dog studies in the regulatory process of agrochemicals approval.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026Article
- Literature horizon scan for new scientific data on plants, microorganisms and animals, and their products obtained by new genomic techniques (March 2026).EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026Article
- Reviewing the thoroughness of human safety testing for succinate dehydrogenase inhibitors: fluopyram as a case study.Archives of toxicology · 2026Review
- Literature horizon scan for new scientific data on plants, microorganisms and animals, and their products obtained by new genomic techniques (October 2025).EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026Article
- Update of the statement on safety of cannabidiol as a novel food.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026Article
- Microbiological safety of ungulates meat intended to be frozen and defrosting of frozen ungulates meat.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026Article
- Scientific Opinion on the application of physiologically based kinetic (PBK) modelling for the quantitative in vitro to in vivo extrapolation (QIVIVE) of developmental neurotoxicity in vitro battery (DNT IVB) data for pesticide active substances.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2025Article
- Guidance on the use of read-across for chemical safety assessment in food and feed.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2025Article
- Chemical Food Safety in Europe Under the Spotlight: Principles, Regulatory Framework and Roadmap for Future Directions.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Impact of non-nutritive sweeteners on bacterial quorum sensing and phenotypic expression: implications for gut microbiome dynamics.Gut microbiome (Cambridge, England) · 2025Article
- Enhancing allergenicity risk assessment for novel foods in the EU: insights from the updated EFSA guidance - requirements, knowledge gaps and research needs.Frontiers in toxicology · 2025Review
- Impact of Missense Mutations on AFB1 Metabolism in Bovine Cytochrome P4503A Isoforms: A Computational Mutagenesis and Molecular Docking Analysis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Guidance for establishing and applying tolerable upper intake levels for vitamins and essential minerals.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
- Standard protocols for plant health scientific assessments.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
- Scientific Committee guidance on appraising and integrating evidence from epidemiological studies for use in EFSA's scientific assessments.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
- Guidance on risk-benefit assessment of foods.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
- BSE risk posed by ruminant collagen and gelatine derived from bones.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
- The impact of the proposed revised Australia's microbiological monitoring programme for beef and sheep meat exported to the EU.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
- Re-evaluation of certain aspects of the EFSA Scientific Opinion of April 2010 on risk assessment of parasites in fishery products, based on new scientific data. Part 1: ToRs1-3.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
35 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
EFSA Strategy 2027 outlines the need for fit-for-purpose protocols for EFSA generic scientific assessments to aid in delivering trustworthy scientific advice. This EFSA Scientific Committee guidance document helps address this need by providing a harmonised and flexible framework for developing protocols for EFSA generic assessments. The guidance replaces the 'Draft framework for protocol development for EFSA's scientific assessments' published in 2020. The two main steps in protocol development are described. The first is problem formulation, which illustrates the objectives of the assessment. Here a new approach to translating the mandated Terms of Reference into scientifically answerable assessment questions and sub-questions is proposed: the 'APRIO' paradigm (Agent, Pathway, Receptor, Intervention and Output). Owing to its cross-cutting nature, this paradigm is considered adaptable and broadly applicable within and across the various EFSA domains and, if applied using the definitions given in this guidance, is expected to help harmonise the problem formulation process and outputs and foster consistency in protocol development. APRIO may also overcome the difficulty of implementing some existing frameworks across the multiple EFSA disciplines, e.g. the PICO/PECO approach (Population, Intervention/Exposure, Comparator, Outcome). Therefore, although not mandatory, APRIO is recommended. The second step in protocol development is the specification of the evidence needs and the methods that will be applied for answering the assessment questions and sub-questions, including uncertainty analysis. Five possible approaches to answering individual (sub-)questions are outlined: using evidence from scientific literature and study reports; using data from databases other than bibliographic; using expert judgement informally collected or elicited via semi-formal or formal expert knowledge elicitation processes; using mathematical/statistical models; and - not covered in this guidance - generating empirical evidence
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.