Stephanie B Kennedy, Melissa M Heintz, William D Klaren, Daniele S Wikoff, Laurie C Haws, Seneca E Fitch
{"title":"An integrated ecotoxicological study reliability (EcoSR) framework for use in toxicity value development.","authors":"Stephanie B Kennedy, Melissa M Heintz, William D Klaren, Daniele S Wikoff, Laurie C Haws, Seneca E Fitch","doi":"10.1093/etojnl/vgaf030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A key component of ecological risk assessments is to develop evidence-based benchmarks to assess potential hazards to various receptors. To ensure that toxicity value development is performed using the best available science, the reliability (or inherent scientific quality) of these studies must be considered. The degree of reliability can be evaluated via critical appraisal tools (CATs), though application of such methods assessing ecotoxicological literature for toxicity value development is not well established compared to human health assessments. A review of existing CATs revealed that there is currently no approach that considers the full range of biases that should be considered for appraisal of internal validity in ecotoxicological studies. Recognizing the need for a comprehensive ecotoxicity study assessment framework that addresses risk of bias (RoB) for the interpretation of study reliability, we propose the Ecotoxicological Study Reliability (EcoSR) framework. This framework builds upon the classic RoB assessment approach, frequently applied in human health assessments. EcoSR adds reliability and key criteria specific to ecotoxicity studies from existing appraisal methods, emphasizing those used by regulatory bodies. Additionally, the framework recommends a priori customization based on assessment goals. EcoSR is comprised of two tiers: an optional preliminary screening (Tier 1) and a full reliability assessment (Tier 2). The framework outlines a systematic approach for conducting ecotoxicity study appraisals that enhances transparency and consistency in determining study reliability. The EcoSR framework provides flexibility and can be refined and applied to a variety of chemical classes. This framework represents a significant step towards improving the transparency and reproducibility of ecotoxicological study appraisals; ultimately, contributing to more informed and reliable toxicity value development within the ecological sciences.</p>","PeriodicalId":11793,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/etojnl/vgaf030","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
A key component of ecological risk assessments is to develop evidence-based benchmarks to assess potential hazards to various receptors. To ensure that toxicity value development is performed using the best available science, the reliability (or inherent scientific quality) of these studies must be considered. The degree of reliability can be evaluated via critical appraisal tools (CATs), though application of such methods assessing ecotoxicological literature for toxicity value development is not well established compared to human health assessments. A review of existing CATs revealed that there is currently no approach that considers the full range of biases that should be considered for appraisal of internal validity in ecotoxicological studies. Recognizing the need for a comprehensive ecotoxicity study assessment framework that addresses risk of bias (RoB) for the interpretation of study reliability, we propose the Ecotoxicological Study Reliability (EcoSR) framework. This framework builds upon the classic RoB assessment approach, frequently applied in human health assessments. EcoSR adds reliability and key criteria specific to ecotoxicity studies from existing appraisal methods, emphasizing those used by regulatory bodies. Additionally, the framework recommends a priori customization based on assessment goals. EcoSR is comprised of two tiers: an optional preliminary screening (Tier 1) and a full reliability assessment (Tier 2). The framework outlines a systematic approach for conducting ecotoxicity study appraisals that enhances transparency and consistency in determining study reliability. The EcoSR framework provides flexibility and can be refined and applied to a variety of chemical classes. This framework represents a significant step towards improving the transparency and reproducibility of ecotoxicological study appraisals; ultimately, contributing to more informed and reliable toxicity value development within the ecological sciences.
期刊介绍:
The Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) publishes two journals: Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (ET&C) and Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management (IEAM). Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry is dedicated to furthering scientific knowledge and disseminating information on environmental toxicology and chemistry, including the application of these sciences to risk assessment.[...]
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry is interdisciplinary in scope and integrates the fields of environmental toxicology; environmental, analytical, and molecular chemistry; ecology; physiology; biochemistry; microbiology; genetics; genomics; environmental engineering; chemical, environmental, and biological modeling; epidemiology; and earth sciences. ET&C seeks to publish papers describing original experimental or theoretical work that significantly advances understanding in the area of environmental toxicology, environmental chemistry and hazard/risk assessment. Emphasis is given to papers that enhance capabilities for the prediction, measurement, and assessment of the fate and effects of chemicals in the environment, rather than simply providing additional data. The scientific impact of papers is judged in terms of the breadth and depth of the findings and the expected influence on existing or future scientific practice. Methodological papers must make clear not only how the work differs from existing practice, but the significance of these differences to the field. Site-based research or monitoring must have regional or global implications beyond the particular site, such as evaluating processes, mechanisms, or theory under a natural environmental setting.