ReviewFrontiers in public health2026
Review of human health exposure assessment frameworks in the United States and development of a unified framework for exposure assessment practitioners.
Review in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The process of conducting a human health exposure assessment has been framed as a stepwise approach by multiple organizations and various authors. However, the recommended steps within these frameworks can vary depending on the organization or author referenced, and it is valuable to have a cohesive analysis of this important topic. The aim of this review was to systematically analyze and compile relevant exposure assessment frameworks in the United States (U.S.) and condense the differing recommended steps to create one consolidated, broadly applicable framework. A review of exposure assessment frameworks identified from U.S. governmental agencies, U.S. consensus guidance organizations, peer-reviewed scientific articles, and book chapters was performed. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied such that only comprehensive exposure assessment frameworks were included in the consolidation process. Five comprehensive exposure assessment frameworks from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the American Industrial Hygiene Association, and the peer-reviewed scientific literature were determined to be appropriate for consolidation into the single framework. The steps identified within each existing approach were aligned to ensure all elements were incorporated into the creation of the final overarching framework, hereinafter referred to as the Unified Exposure Assessment Framework (UEAF) for human health risk assessment. The UEAF includes all essential elements of the identified published frameworks and further captures nuances within each source to allow practitioners to have one comprehensive process to reference when preparing to conduct an exposure assessment. Additional frameworks with specific nuances, or those identified as critical resources in the field, were also assessed and discussed. Through this effort, occupational and environmental health and safety (OEHS) and exposure science practitioners are provided with a consolidated crosswalk and proposed stepwise structure that may support more consistent consideration of key exposure assessment elements across U.S.-based occupational and environmental contexts.
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.