Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Implementing systematic review techniques in ch...

Electronic data

  • Whaley_et_al (3)

    Rights statement: This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Environment International. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Environment International, 92-93, 2016 DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2015.11.002 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

    Accepted author manuscript, 244 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY-NC-ND

  • 1_s2.0_S0160412015300866_main

    Rights statement: © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

    Final published version, 1.05 MB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Implementing systematic review techniques in chemical risk assessment: challenges, opportunities and recommendations

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Implementing systematic review techniques in chemical risk assessment : challenges, opportunities and recommendations. / Whaley, Paul; Halsall, Crispin James; Ågerstrand, Marlene; Aiassa, Elisa; Benford, Diane; Bilotta, Gary S.; Coggon, David; Collins, Chris; Dempsey, Ciara; Duarte-Davidson, Raquel; Fitzgerald, Rex; Galay-Burgos, Malyka; Gee, David; Hoffmann, Sebastian; Lam, Juleen; Lasserson, Toby J.; Levy, Len; Lipworth, Steven; Mackenzie Ross, Sarah; Martin, Olwenn; Meads, Catherine; Meyer-Baron, Monika; Miller, James; Pease, Camilla; Rooney, Andrew; Sapiets, Alison; Stewart, Gavin; Taylor, David.

In: Environment International, Vol. 92-93, 07.2016, p. 556-564.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Whaley, P, Halsall, CJ, Ågerstrand, M, Aiassa, E, Benford, D, Bilotta, GS, Coggon, D, Collins, C, Dempsey, C, Duarte-Davidson, R, Fitzgerald, R, Galay-Burgos, M, Gee, D, Hoffmann, S, Lam, J, Lasserson, TJ, Levy, L, Lipworth, S, Mackenzie Ross, S, Martin, O, Meads, C, Meyer-Baron, M, Miller, J, Pease, C, Rooney, A, Sapiets, A, Stewart, G & Taylor, D 2016, 'Implementing systematic review techniques in chemical risk assessment: challenges, opportunities and recommendations', Environment International, vol. 92-93, pp. 556-564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2015.11.002

APA

Whaley, P., Halsall, C. J., Ågerstrand, M., Aiassa, E., Benford, D., Bilotta, G. S., Coggon, D., Collins, C., Dempsey, C., Duarte-Davidson, R., Fitzgerald, R., Galay-Burgos, M., Gee, D., Hoffmann, S., Lam, J., Lasserson, T. J., Levy, L., Lipworth, S., Mackenzie Ross, S., ... Taylor, D. (2016). Implementing systematic review techniques in chemical risk assessment: challenges, opportunities and recommendations. Environment International, 92-93, 556-564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2015.11.002

Vancouver

Author

Whaley, Paul ; Halsall, Crispin James ; Ågerstrand, Marlene ; Aiassa, Elisa ; Benford, Diane ; Bilotta, Gary S. ; Coggon, David ; Collins, Chris ; Dempsey, Ciara ; Duarte-Davidson, Raquel ; Fitzgerald, Rex ; Galay-Burgos, Malyka ; Gee, David ; Hoffmann, Sebastian ; Lam, Juleen ; Lasserson, Toby J. ; Levy, Len ; Lipworth, Steven ; Mackenzie Ross, Sarah ; Martin, Olwenn ; Meads, Catherine ; Meyer-Baron, Monika ; Miller, James ; Pease, Camilla ; Rooney, Andrew ; Sapiets, Alison ; Stewart, Gavin ; Taylor, David. / Implementing systematic review techniques in chemical risk assessment : challenges, opportunities and recommendations. In: Environment International. 2016 ; Vol. 92-93. pp. 556-564.

Bibtex

@article{f01ff4cfd6464485b0a1e5b3a4728096,
title = "Implementing systematic review techniques in chemical risk assessment: challenges, opportunities and recommendations",
abstract = "Systematic review (SR) is a rigorous, protocol-driven approach designed to minimise error and bias when summarising the body of research evidence relevant to a specific scientific question. Taking as a comparator the use of SR in synthesising research in healthcare, we argue that SR methods could also pave the way for a “step change” in the transparency, objectivity and communication of chemical risk assessments (CRA) in Europe and elsewhere. We suggest that current controversies around the safety of certain chemicals are partly due to limitations in current CRA procedures which have contributed to ambiguity about the health risks posed by these substances. We present an overview of how SR methods can be applied to the assessment of risks from chemicals, and indicate how challenges in adapting SR methods from healthcare research to the CRA context might be overcome. Regarding the latter, we report the outcomes from a workshop exploring how to increase uptake of SR methods, attended by experts representing a wide range of fields related to chemical toxicology, risk analysis and SR. Priorities which were identified include: the conduct of CRA-focused prototype SRs; the development of a recognised standard of reporting and conduct for SRs in toxicology and CRA; and establishing a network to facilitate research, communication and training in SR methods. We see this paper as a milestone in the creation of a research climate that fosters communication between experts in CRA and SR and facilitates wider uptake of SR methods into CRA.",
keywords = "Risk assessment, Research synthesis, Environment, Chemicals, Systematic review, Toxicology",
author = "Paul Whaley and Halsall, {Crispin James} and Marlene {\AA}gerstrand and Elisa Aiassa and Diane Benford and Bilotta, {Gary S.} and David Coggon and Chris Collins and Ciara Dempsey and Raquel Duarte-Davidson and Rex Fitzgerald and Malyka Galay-Burgos and David Gee and Sebastian Hoffmann and Juleen Lam and Lasserson, {Toby J.} and Len Levy and Steven Lipworth and {Mackenzie Ross}, Sarah and Olwenn Martin and Catherine Meads and Monika Meyer-Baron and James Miller and Camilla Pease and Andrew Rooney and Alison Sapiets and Gavin Stewart and David Taylor",
note = "{\textcopyright} 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). ",
year = "2016",
month = jul,
doi = "10.1016/j.envint.2015.11.002",
language = "English",
volume = "92-93",
pages = "556--564",
journal = "Environment International",
issn = "0160-4120",
publisher = "Elsevier Ltd",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Implementing systematic review techniques in chemical risk assessment

T2 - challenges, opportunities and recommendations

AU - Whaley, Paul

AU - Halsall, Crispin James

AU - Ågerstrand, Marlene

AU - Aiassa, Elisa

AU - Benford, Diane

AU - Bilotta, Gary S.

AU - Coggon, David

AU - Collins, Chris

AU - Dempsey, Ciara

AU - Duarte-Davidson, Raquel

AU - Fitzgerald, Rex

AU - Galay-Burgos, Malyka

AU - Gee, David

AU - Hoffmann, Sebastian

AU - Lam, Juleen

AU - Lasserson, Toby J.

AU - Levy, Len

AU - Lipworth, Steven

AU - Mackenzie Ross, Sarah

AU - Martin, Olwenn

AU - Meads, Catherine

AU - Meyer-Baron, Monika

AU - Miller, James

AU - Pease, Camilla

AU - Rooney, Andrew

AU - Sapiets, Alison

AU - Stewart, Gavin

AU - Taylor, David

N1 - © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

PY - 2016/7

Y1 - 2016/7

N2 - Systematic review (SR) is a rigorous, protocol-driven approach designed to minimise error and bias when summarising the body of research evidence relevant to a specific scientific question. Taking as a comparator the use of SR in synthesising research in healthcare, we argue that SR methods could also pave the way for a “step change” in the transparency, objectivity and communication of chemical risk assessments (CRA) in Europe and elsewhere. We suggest that current controversies around the safety of certain chemicals are partly due to limitations in current CRA procedures which have contributed to ambiguity about the health risks posed by these substances. We present an overview of how SR methods can be applied to the assessment of risks from chemicals, and indicate how challenges in adapting SR methods from healthcare research to the CRA context might be overcome. Regarding the latter, we report the outcomes from a workshop exploring how to increase uptake of SR methods, attended by experts representing a wide range of fields related to chemical toxicology, risk analysis and SR. Priorities which were identified include: the conduct of CRA-focused prototype SRs; the development of a recognised standard of reporting and conduct for SRs in toxicology and CRA; and establishing a network to facilitate research, communication and training in SR methods. We see this paper as a milestone in the creation of a research climate that fosters communication between experts in CRA and SR and facilitates wider uptake of SR methods into CRA.

AB - Systematic review (SR) is a rigorous, protocol-driven approach designed to minimise error and bias when summarising the body of research evidence relevant to a specific scientific question. Taking as a comparator the use of SR in synthesising research in healthcare, we argue that SR methods could also pave the way for a “step change” in the transparency, objectivity and communication of chemical risk assessments (CRA) in Europe and elsewhere. We suggest that current controversies around the safety of certain chemicals are partly due to limitations in current CRA procedures which have contributed to ambiguity about the health risks posed by these substances. We present an overview of how SR methods can be applied to the assessment of risks from chemicals, and indicate how challenges in adapting SR methods from healthcare research to the CRA context might be overcome. Regarding the latter, we report the outcomes from a workshop exploring how to increase uptake of SR methods, attended by experts representing a wide range of fields related to chemical toxicology, risk analysis and SR. Priorities which were identified include: the conduct of CRA-focused prototype SRs; the development of a recognised standard of reporting and conduct for SRs in toxicology and CRA; and establishing a network to facilitate research, communication and training in SR methods. We see this paper as a milestone in the creation of a research climate that fosters communication between experts in CRA and SR and facilitates wider uptake of SR methods into CRA.

KW - Risk assessment

KW - Research synthesis

KW - Environment

KW - Chemicals

KW - Systematic review

KW - Toxicology

U2 - 10.1016/j.envint.2015.11.002

DO - 10.1016/j.envint.2015.11.002

M3 - Journal article

VL - 92-93

SP - 556

EP - 564

JO - Environment International

JF - Environment International

SN - 0160-4120

ER -