eprintid: 10197301 rev_number: 10 eprint_status: archive userid: 699 dir: disk0/10/19/73/01 datestamp: 2024-10-14 10:55:34 lastmod: 2024-10-14 10:55:34 status_changed: 2024-10-14 10:55:34 type: article metadata_visibility: show sword_depositor: 699 creators_name: Whaley, Paul creators_name: Halsall, Crispin creators_name: Agerstrand, Marlene creators_name: Aiassa, Elisa creators_name: Benford, Diane creators_name: Bilotta, Gary creators_name: Coggon, David creators_name: Collins, Chris creators_name: Dempsey, Ciara creators_name: Duarte-Davidson, Raquel creators_name: FitzGerald, Rex creators_name: Galay-Burgos, Malyka creators_name: Gee, David creators_name: Hoffmann, Sebastian creators_name: Lam, Juleen creators_name: Lasserson, Toby creators_name: Levy, Len creators_name: Lipworth, Steven creators_name: Ross, Sarah Mackenzie creators_name: Martin, Olwenn creators_name: Meads, Catherine creators_name: Meyer-Baron, Monika creators_name: Miller, James creators_name: Pease, Camilla creators_name: Rooney, Andrew creators_name: Sapiets, Alison creators_name: Stewart, Gavin creators_name: Taylor, David title: Implementing systematic review techniques in chemical risk assessment: Challenges, opportunities and recommendations ispublished: pub divisions: UCL divisions: B03 divisions: C01 divisions: K22 keywords: Risk assessment, Research synthesis, Environment, Chemicals, Systematic review, Toxicology note: © The Author(s), 2016. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 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. date: 2016-07 date_type: published publisher: PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD official_url: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2015.11.002 oa_status: green full_text_type: pub language: eng primo: open primo_central: open_green verified: verified_manual elements_id: 1096984 doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2015.11.002 medium: Print-Electronic pii: S0160-4120(15)30086-6 lyricists_name: Martin, Olwenn lyricists_id: OMART84 actors_name: Martin, Olwenn actors_id: OMART84 actors_role: owner funding_acknowledgements: [Economic & Social Science Research Council grant "Radical Futures in Social Sciences" (Lancaster University)]; [Lancaster Environment Centre]; [Lancaster University's Faculty of Science Technology]; MC_UU_12011/5 [MRC]; MC_UP_A620_1018 [MRC]; NE/L00836X/1 [NERC]; MC_UU_12011/5 [Medical Research Council]; MC_UP_A620_1018 [Medical Research Council]; U1475000005 [Medical Research Council]; ceh010010 [Natural Environment Research Council]; NE/L00836X/1 [Natural Environment Research Council] full_text_status: public publication: Environment International volume: 92-93 pagerange: 556-564 pages: 9 event_location: Netherlands issn: 0160-4120 citation: Whaley, Paul; Halsall, Crispin; Agerstrand, Marlene; Aiassa, Elisa; Benford, Diane; Bilotta, Gary; Coggon, David; ... Taylor, David; + view all <#> Whaley, Paul; Halsall, Crispin; Agerstrand, Marlene; Aiassa, Elisa; Benford, Diane; Bilotta, Gary; Coggon, David; Collins, Chris; Dempsey, Ciara; Duarte-Davidson, Raquel; FitzGerald, Rex; Galay-Burgos, Malyka; Gee, David; Hoffmann, Sebastian; Lam, Juleen; Lasserson, Toby; Levy, Len; Lipworth, Steven; Ross, Sarah Mackenzie; Martin, Olwenn; Meads, Catherine; Meyer-Baron, Monika; Miller, James; Pease, Camilla; Rooney, Andrew; Sapiets, Alison; Stewart, Gavin; Taylor, David; - view fewer <#> (2016) Implementing systematic review techniques in chemical risk assessment: Challenges, opportunities and recommendations. Environment International , 92-93 pp. 556-564. 10.1016/j.envint.2015.11.002 <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2015.11.002>. Green open access document_url: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10197301/1/Martin_1-s2.0-S0160412015300866-main.pdf