ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2026
Updated peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance dichlorprop-P and variant dichlorprop-P-2-ethylhexyl.
Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2026. 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.
- Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance cinmethylin.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026Article
- Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance diflufenican.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
50 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Ireland and co-rapporteur Member State, Poland, for the pesticide active substance dichlorprop-P and the variant dichlorprop-P-2-ethylhexyl and the assessment of applications for maximum residue levels (MRLs) are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached based on the evaluation of the representative uses of dichlorprop-P as herbicide on cereals, grassland and grass seed crops and of the variant dichlorprop-P-2-ethylhexyl as a plant growth regulator on citrus. MRLs were assessed in mandarin and lemon. The conclusions from 2018 were updated in 2024 following the request from the European Commission regarding the endocrine disruption properties. The conclusions were further updated in 2025 in the context of the peer review required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council for an amendment in approval conditions. The purpose of this application was to extend the existing approval to include the ester variant dichlorprop-P-2-ethylhexyl under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment and the proposed MRLs, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified.
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.