ReviewiScience2025
Optimizing the implementation of safe and sustainable by design to better enable sustainable innovation.
Review in iScience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Harnessing plant growth-promoting bacteria for nanoparticle biosynthesis: a systematic review of mechanisms, agricultural applications, and biomedical potential.Bioprocess and biosystems engineering · 2026Pooled it
- New approach methodologies for next-generation risk assessment of nanomaterials and nano-enabled products.Nano convergence · 2026Review
- Wastewater Treatment Challenges and Circular Reuse for One Health Sustainability: A Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Review
- A call for chemical safety and sustainability.Nature reviews. Chemistry · 2026Article
- Silver integrated hybrids and nanocomposites for next-generation biomedicine: Beyond antimicrobial coatings toward smart sense-response-heal platforms.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The concept of safe and sustainable by design (SSbD) combines considerations of human safety, environmental safety, and sustainability. The SSbD framework developed by the European Commission's (EC) Joint Research Centre (JRC) and the Safe(r) and Sustainable Innovation Approach (SSIA) developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) are two key examples of how SSbD concepts could be implemented in future regulatory frameworks. SSbD assessment can greatly aid the innovation process to ensure that new chemicals/materials, processes, and products are safe and sustainable throughout the life cycle. Unilever is a global consumer goods company that integrates the latest safety and sustainability science and SSbD principles in the innovation process. In this work, we review the JRC SSbD framework and OECD SSIA, taking into consideration the reflections of stakeholders through a review of published and gray literature, to evaluate to what extent they enable SSbD innovation. We make recommendations on how current gaps and challenges can be addressed to enable maximal uptake by all stakeholders across the value chain. The recommendations are mainly aimed at ensuring that the JRC SSbD framework and OECD SSIA are conceptually robust and addressing the practical elements in the use of the latest scientific methodology, availability of data, tools, guidance, and a standardized approach to interpreting results and decision-making, through short- and longer term efforts.
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.