Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39958986›Full record

ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2025

Statement on the update of maximum residue levels (MRLs) for copper compounds in light of the EFSA scientific opinion on the re-evaluation of the health-based guidance values (HBGVs) and exposure assessment from all sources.

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2025. 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. The 2024 European Union report on pesticide residues in food.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026
    Article
  3. The 2023 European Union report on pesticide residues in food.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2025
    Article
  4. 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

1 author.

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In compliance with Article 43 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) reviewed the maximum residue levels (MRLs) for copper compounds in light of the EFSA Scientific Committee opinion on the re-evaluation of the health-based guidance values (HBGVs) and exposure assessment from all sources. Based on the exposure calculations performed according to three different scenarios, the updated occurrence data and the residues from the new intended uses are not expected to have an impact on the chronic exposure calculations conducted under the framework of the EFSA Scientific Committee assessment. Therefore, the conclusions of the previous assessment by EFSA Scientific Committee are still valid. Since the current copper exposure is expected to cover all sources of copper, including the uses of copper as plant protection products (PPPs), it can be concluded that the authorised PPP uses for copper compounds and the new intended PPP uses present no health risk for the population, including children. Due to copper being also a micronutrient and ubiquitous in the environment, as requested in the mandate, the dietary risk assessment was performed following a different approach than the standard methodology for the dietary risk assessment of pesticide residues in the framework of setting and reviewing MRLs under Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 and in the peer review of pesticides under Regulation (EU) No 1107/2009. Therefore, all MRL proposals are suggested for further consideration by risk managers.

Indexed as

consumer risk assessmentcopperMRLsRegulation (EC) No 396/2005

Identifiers

PMID39958986
PMCPMC11826219

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
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.