ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2025
Analysis of the evidence to support the definition of specific protection goals for terrestrial organisms-Part 1: Proposed strategy.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Protocols for the development of the guidance on the risk assessment of PPP to non-target arthropods, in-soil organisms and non-target terrestrial plants.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026Article
- Analysis of the evidence to support the definition of specific protection goals for terrestrial organisms-Part 1: Proposed strategy.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The review of the Terrestrial Ecotoxicology Guidance concerns three groups of non-target organisms (NTOs): non-target arthropods other than bees, in-soil organisms and non-target terrestrial plants. Thus, specific protection goals (SPGs) would need to be defined for all these groups. In view of the link between direct and indirect effects, the need to include considerations of indirect effects via trophic interactions when setting SPGs was recognised. This document serves to illustrate the strategy proposed by the Working Group for supporting Risk Managers in the definition of the SPGs. The methodology uses as a starting point previous Scientific Opinions of the PPR Panel where SPG options were comprehensively explored. Following an analysis and synthesis of such Opinions, the Working Group has elaborated further the various options and has identified key aspects requiring further consideration, mainly pertaining to the definition of the magnitude of acceptable effects and the related timescale. To address those aspects a methodology for building multiple lines of evidence is presented.
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.