Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40462441›Full record

ReviewPest management science2025

Measured exposures to glyphosate in applicators and the general population: an updated review of the scientific literature since 2020.

Keith R Solomon

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pest management science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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.

Keith R SolomonSchool of Environmental Sciences, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8496-6413

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Glyphosate is one of the most widely used herbicides in the world and its continued use in agriculture and other scenarios is the focus of intense public and scientific interest. Glyphosate is also controversial in that it was declared 'probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A)' by the International Agency for Research on Cancer in 2015. However, since that time, regulatory agencies in many countries have reviewed the public literature and guideline studies submitted for regulatory purposes and have concluded that it is not a carcinogen. The acceptable daily intakes (ADIs) and the reference dose (RfD) have been revised and restrictions on use have been lifted in many locations. Risk assessment for any pesticide requires information on exposure in humans and the environment and this was reviewed in 2016 and in 2020. Since 2020 many studies have been published in the literature and by government departments. Most of these studies have focused on exposures of the general population, which is the subject of this paper. Based on the studies published since 2020, the overall conclusion is that exposure of applicators and the general population to glyphosate represents a de minimis risk. In addition, a general observation from the larger population-based studies that conduct routine sampling is that exposures have declined somewhat since 2020. © 2025 The Author(s). Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.

Indexed as

Environmental ExposureGlycineHerbicidesOccupational ExposureGlyphosateHumansRisk AssessmentGlycineGlyphosateHerbicidesapplicatorsdietaryexposurepopulationsystemic dose

Identifiers

PMID40462441
PMCPMC12332119

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-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.