EFSA's framework for evidence-based scientific assessments: A case study on uncertainty analysis.

ALTEX Pub Date : 2022-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-06-28 DOI:10.14573/altex.2004211
Elisa Aiassa, Caroline Merten, Laura Martino
{"title":"EFSA's framework for evidence-based scientific assessments: A case study on uncertainty analysis.","authors":"Elisa Aiassa,&nbsp;Caroline Merten,&nbsp;Laura Martino","doi":"10.14573/altex.2004211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To provide sound scientific advice in support of the European decision-making process in food and feed safety, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has defined the principles for producing “evidence-based scientific assessments” (impartiality, methodological rigor, transparency, and engagement) and, to help fulfil them, has developed cross-cutting methodological approaches. This paper focusses on two of these approaches: conducting scientific assessments in four steps – with an emphasis on developing a protocol for the assessment a priori – and analyzing uncertainty. An overview of the 4-step approach and of the methods for addressing uncertainty is given, and a case study on uncertainty analysis, developed in collaboration with the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, is illustrated. The main advantage related to the implementation of protocols and uncertainty analysis is improvement of the scientific value of the outputs. However, experience and further capacity-building is needed to better incorporate uncertainty analysis into the planning phase (protocol) of the scientific assessment process. The case study is based on exposure in humans. Nonetheless it provides an example of a framework for evidence-based scientific assessments that is applicable also to other types of evidence, including evidence arising from new approach methodologies. Adopting the proposed framework, which covers an analysis of uncertainties in the planning and implementation phase, is expected to foster the integration of multiple evidence sources, including alternative methods and testing strategies, in the regulatory scientific assessment process.</p>","PeriodicalId":520550,"journal":{"name":"ALTEX","volume":" ","pages":"451–462"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ALTEX","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14573/altex.2004211","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/6/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

To provide sound scientific advice in support of the European decision-making process in food and feed safety, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has defined the principles for producing “evidence-based scientific assessments” (impartiality, methodological rigor, transparency, and engagement) and, to help fulfil them, has developed cross-cutting methodological approaches. This paper focusses on two of these approaches: conducting scientific assessments in four steps – with an emphasis on developing a protocol for the assessment a priori – and analyzing uncertainty. An overview of the 4-step approach and of the methods for addressing uncertainty is given, and a case study on uncertainty analysis, developed in collaboration with the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, is illustrated. The main advantage related to the implementation of protocols and uncertainty analysis is improvement of the scientific value of the outputs. However, experience and further capacity-building is needed to better incorporate uncertainty analysis into the planning phase (protocol) of the scientific assessment process. The case study is based on exposure in humans. Nonetheless it provides an example of a framework for evidence-based scientific assessments that is applicable also to other types of evidence, including evidence arising from new approach methodologies. Adopting the proposed framework, which covers an analysis of uncertainties in the planning and implementation phase, is expected to foster the integration of multiple evidence sources, including alternative methods and testing strategies, in the regulatory scientific assessment process.

欧洲食品安全局基于证据的科学评估框架:不确定性分析的案例研究。
为了提供可靠的科学建议以支持欧洲食品和饲料安全决策过程,欧洲食品安全局(EFSA)定义了产生“基于证据的科学评估”的原则(公正性、方法严密性、透明度和参与性),并开发了跨领域的方法方法来帮助实现这些原则。本文集中讨论了其中的两种方法:分四个步骤进行科学评估——重点是为先验评估制定一个方案——以及分析不确定性。概述了四步法和解决不确定性的方法,并说明了与德国联邦风险评估研究所合作开发的不确定性分析的案例研究。与协议的实施和不确定性分析相关的主要优势是提高了产出的科学价值。但是,需要经验和进一步的能力建设,以便更好地将不确定性分析纳入科学评估过程的规划阶段(议定书)。该案例研究基于人类接触。尽管如此,它提供了一个以证据为基础的科学评估框架的例子,该框架也适用于其他类型的证据,包括新方法方法产生的证据。采用拟议的框架,包括对规划和实施阶段的不确定性的分析,预计将在监管科学评估过程中促进多种证据来源的整合,包括替代方法和测试策略。
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