Science Advisory Panels: Results of a Survey of Panel Participants

S. Hays, R. Becker, Nelson Dm, Kirman Cr
{"title":"Science Advisory Panels: Results of a Survey of Panel Participants","authors":"S. Hays, R. Becker, Nelson Dm, Kirman Cr","doi":"10.23937/2572-4061.1510038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Science panel deliberations serve as an important step in policy and regulatory decision making, ideally providing independent validation that the decisions under consideration are based on sound scientific evidence and interpretation. To be useful, the findings from a science panel should be trusted by all parties involved (e.g., regulatory decision makers, participating scientists, general public, regulated industries). A survey was conducted of scientists who had participated in science advisory panels for regulatory agencies to gain a better understanding of their experiences. The purpose of the survey was to gain insight on science panel design with respect to: 1) Science panel recruitment and selection; 2) Science panel deliberations; and 3) Science panel reporting. We received input from more than 100 scientists, who reported both positive and negative experiences with science panels, and recommended a number of improvements. These recommendations included the need for greater transparency and the necessity to better manage internal and external sources of pressure that can adversely impact panel deliberations. The results of this survey are presented, and design elements that should be considered for improving science panel deliberations are discussed.","PeriodicalId":174677,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology and Risk Assessment","volume":"67 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Toxicology and Risk Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23937/2572-4061.1510038","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Science panel deliberations serve as an important step in policy and regulatory decision making, ideally providing independent validation that the decisions under consideration are based on sound scientific evidence and interpretation. To be useful, the findings from a science panel should be trusted by all parties involved (e.g., regulatory decision makers, participating scientists, general public, regulated industries). A survey was conducted of scientists who had participated in science advisory panels for regulatory agencies to gain a better understanding of their experiences. The purpose of the survey was to gain insight on science panel design with respect to: 1) Science panel recruitment and selection; 2) Science panel deliberations; and 3) Science panel reporting. We received input from more than 100 scientists, who reported both positive and negative experiences with science panels, and recommended a number of improvements. These recommendations included the need for greater transparency and the necessity to better manage internal and external sources of pressure that can adversely impact panel deliberations. The results of this survey are presented, and design elements that should be considered for improving science panel deliberations are discussed.
科学顾问小组:小组成员调查结果
科学小组审议是政策和监管决策的重要步骤,理想情况下可以提供独立的验证,证明所考虑的决定是基于可靠的科学证据和解释。为了发挥作用,科学小组的发现应该得到所有相关各方的信任(例如,监管决策者、参与的科学家、普通公众、受监管的行业)。为了更好地了解他们的经历,对参加过监管机构科学咨询小组的科学家进行了一项调查。调查的目的是了解科学小组的设计,包括:1)科学小组的招聘和选择;2)科学小组审议;3)科学小组报告。我们收到了100多名科学家的意见,他们报告了科学小组的积极和消极经验,并提出了一些改进建议。这些建议包括需要提高透明度和必须更好地管理可能对小组审议产生不利影响的内部和外部压力来源。提出了调查结果,并讨论了改进科学小组审议应考虑的设计要素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信