Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39239089›Full record

ArticleEvidence-based toxicology2024

Cross-mapping of terms used in chemical risk assessment with those used in systematic review: research protocol.

Camilla Svendsen, Gro H Mathisen, Gunn E Vist, Trine Husøy, Heather M Ames, Anna Beronius, Emma Di Consiglio, Ingrid Druwe, Thomas Hartung, Sebastian Hoffmann and 12 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Evidence-based toxicology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Evidence-based AI: from trailblazer to trustblazer?Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Mapping assays to the key characteristics of carcinogens to support decision-making.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2025
    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

22 authors.

Camilla SvendsenNorwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Gro H MathisenNorwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Gunn E VistNorwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Trine HusøyNorwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Heather M AmesNorwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Anna BeroniusInstitute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Emma Di ConsiglioEnvironment & Health Department, Italian National Institute of Health (ISS), Rome, Italy.
Ingrid DruweUnited States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessments, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Thomas HartungCenter for Alternatives to Animal Testing (CAAT), Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Sebastian HoffmannEvidence-based toxicology collaboration (EBTC), Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Carlijn R HooijmansDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Care, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Kyriaki MacheraLaboratory of Toxicological Control of Pesticides, Scientific Directorate of Pesticides' Control and Phytopharmacy, Benaki Phytopathological Institute, Kifissia, Greece.
Joshua F RobinsonDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), USA.
Erwin Roggen3Rs Management and Consulting ApS, Lyngby, Denmark.
Andrew A RooneyDivision of Translational Toxicology, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Nicolas RothDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Eliana SpiliotiLaboratory of Toxicological Control of Pesticides, Scientific Directorate of Pesticides' Control and Phytopharmacy, Benaki Phytopathological Institute, Kifissia, Greece.
Anastasia SpyropoulouLaboratory of Toxicological Control of Pesticides, Scientific Directorate of Pesticides' Control and Phytopharmacy, Benaki Phytopathological Institute, Kifissia, Greece.
Olga TcheremenskaiaEnvironment & Health Department, Italian National Institute of Health (ISS), Rome, Italy.
Emanuela TestaiEnvironment & Health Department, Italian National Institute of Health (ISS), Rome, Italy.
Mathieu VinkenDepartment of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Brussel; Belgium.
Paul WhaleyNorwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

UCSF Environmental Research and Translation for Health Center (EaRTH Center)P30ES030284 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI JENNIFER C FUNG, Tracey J. Woodruff · 2020 to 2026
$11.2M
Intramural EPA EPA999999Intramural NIH HHS Z99 ES999999NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES030284
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The focus on implementation of systematic review (SR) principles in chemical risk assessments (CRAs) is growing as it has the potential to advance the rigour and transparency of the CRAs. However, the SR and CRA communities use their own specific terminologies. Understanding the meaning of core SR and CRA terms and where they overlap is critical for application of SR methods and principles in CRAs. Moreover, it will increase the possibility for cross-sectorial collaboration, avoid misunderstandings, and improve communication among risk assessors, researchers, and policy makers. We present a process for the cross-mapping of core CRA terms and core SR terms. Core terms for study appraisal, evidence synthesis and integration used in the SR and CRA communities will be included. The outcome will be an overview of how core SR terms map onto core CRA terms and vice versa, and a description of the relationship and conceptual overlap between the terms. The cross-mapping is divided in three phases, where in the first phase the core SR and CRA terms will be identified. In the second phase, existing SR and CRA definitions will be mapped. In the third phase, descriptions of the relationship and conceptual overlap between the terms will be derived. The third phase will include weekly one-hour online meetings for SR and CRA experts.

Indexed as

Conceptual overlapcross-mappingdefinitionsinteroperabilityterminology

Identifiers

PMID39239089
PMCPMC11376327

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.