ReviewToxics2024
Advancing Endocrine Disruptors via In Vitro Evaluation: Recognizing the Significance of the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development and United States Environmental Protection Agency Guidelines, Embracing New Assessment Methods, and the Urgent Need for a Comprehensive Battery of Tests.
Review in Toxics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sensitive detection of unopposed estrogen using estrogen receptor functionalized nanoprobes for cancer diagnosis.Discover nano · 2026Review
- SynergisticiScience · 2026Article
- Eco-Friendly Biomass-Based Carbon Dots, Carbon Nanotubes, Graphene, and Their Derivatives for Enhanced Oil Recovery: A New Horizon for Petroleum Industry.ChemistryOpen · 2025Review
- Rat embryonic stem cell-basedFrontiers in toxicology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Efforts are being made globally to improve the evaluation and understanding of endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Recognition of their impact on human health and the environment has stimulated attention and research in this field. Various stakeholders, including scientists, regulatory agencies, policymakers, and industry representatives, are collaborating to develop robust methodologies and guidelines for assessing these disruptors. A key aspect of these efforts is the development of standardized testing protocols and guidelines that aim to provide consistent and reliable methods for identifying and characterizing endocrine disruptors. When evaluating the potential endocrine-disrupting activity of chemicals, no single test is capable of detecting all relevant endocrine-disrupting agents. The test battery approach is designed to reduce the risk of false negative results for compounds with toxic potential. A weight-of-evidence approach is therefore necessary for endocrine disruptor evaluation. This approach considers various types of data from multiple sources, assessing the overall strength, consistency, and reliability of the evidence. OECD guidelines are highly regarded for their scientific rigor, transparency, and consensus-based development process. It is crucial to explore and develop new methodologies that can effectively evaluate the risks associated with potential endocrine disruptors. Integrating these methods into a comprehensive weight-of-evidence framework will enhance risk assessments and facilitate informed decisions regarding the regulation and management of these substances, ensuring the protection of human health and the environment from their adverse effects.
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.