Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39869190›Full record

SynthesisArchives of toxicology2025

Evaluation of developmental toxicity of chlorpyrifos through new approach methodologies: a systematic review.

L Coppola, G Lori, S Tait, M A Sogorb, C Estevan

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Archives of toxicology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Responses of cotton jassid (Frontiers in insect science · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors.

L Coppola *Center for Gender-Specific Medicine, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.
G Lori *Center for Gender-Specific Medicine, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.
S TaitCenter for Gender-Specific Medicine, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.
M A SogorbBioengineering Institute, Miguel Hernández de Elche University, Elche, Spain.
C EstevanApplied Biology Department, Miguel Hernández de Elche University, Elche, Spain. cestevan@umh.es.ORCID 0000-0002-3151-9249

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chlorpyrifos (CPF) is an organophosphorus pesticide of concern because many in vivo animal studies have demonstrated developmental toxicity exerted by this substance; however, despite its widespread use, evidence from epidemiological studies is still limited. In this study, we have collected all the information generated in the twenty-first century on the developmental toxicity of CPF using new approach methodologies. We have critically evaluated and integrated information coming from 70 papers considering human, rodent, avian and fish models. The comparison of the collected evidence with available adverse outcome pathways allows us to conclude that adverse outcomes observed in animals, such as memory and learning impairments as well as reduction in cognitive function, could involve several mechanisms of action including inhibition of acetylcholinesterase, overactivation of glutamate receptors and activation of mitogen-activated protein kinase, extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2, followed by both disruption of neurotransmitter release and increase in oxidative stress and apoptosis.

Indexed as

ChlorpyrifosInsecticidesToxicity TestsAnimalsApoptosisCholinesterase InhibitorsHumansOxidative StressChlorpyrifosCholinesterase InhibitorsInsecticidesChlorpyrifosDevelopmental toxicityNAMsNew approach methodologiesSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID39869190
PMCPMC11821739

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.