C. Kirman, P. Cocco, G. Eslick, PJ Villeneuve, S. Hays
{"title":"Meta-Analyses of Glyphosate and Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma: Expert Panel Conclusions and Recommendations","authors":"C. Kirman, P. Cocco, G. Eslick, PJ Villeneuve, S. Hays","doi":"10.23937/2572-4061.1510044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An expert panel was assembled to support a review of a series of recent publications using a modified Delphi format. These publications were scored based on a consideration of confidence in their methods, results, conclusions, and applicability to risk-based decision making. Mean confidence scores for the papers reviewed ranged from 53 to 74 (maximum score = 100), and key strengths and concerns were identified. This review highlights the need for transparency in meta-analyses. Different conclusions were reached in available meta-analyses because of varying criteria used to select studies, selection of different risk estimates within the same study, and study availability.","PeriodicalId":174677,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology and Risk Assessment","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-31","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/10.23937/2572-4061.1510044","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
An expert panel was assembled to support a review of a series of recent publications using a modified Delphi format. These publications were scored based on a consideration of confidence in their methods, results, conclusions, and applicability to risk-based decision making. Mean confidence scores for the papers reviewed ranged from 53 to 74 (maximum score = 100), and key strengths and concerns were identified. This review highlights the need for transparency in meta-analyses. Different conclusions were reached in available meta-analyses because of varying criteria used to select studies, selection of different risk estimates within the same study, and study availability.