美国人类健康参考值的比较回顾。

IF 4.1 3区 医学 Q2 TOXICOLOGY
George M Woodall, Sarah E Kobylewski-Saucier, Rachel M Shaffer, April M Luke, Laura M Carlson
{"title":"美国人类健康参考值的比较回顾。","authors":"George M Woodall, Sarah E Kobylewski-Saucier, Rachel M Shaffer, April M Luke, Laura M Carlson","doi":"10.1093/toxsci/kfaf092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Human health-based reference values (HHRVs) developed by United States (U.S.) governmental agencies and professional organizations are derived for specific purposes related to their organizational or statutory mandates, and for individual chemicals or substance groups (e.g., manganese compounds). Choosing an appropriate chemical-specific value should be based on the risk assessment need and the specific exposure context, along with a basic understanding of the various types and the intended purposes of each available HHRV. In this overview, HHRVs have been broadly organized into three main categories: Values for the general public; occupational exposure limits; and emergency response values. The goal of this overview is to equip the reader with a greater understanding of HHRVs, how they are meant to be applied, and key aspects to consider in selecting the most appropriate value. These key aspects include target population (e.g., general public of all ages vs. working-age adults), duration and frequency of exposure, health effect severity, confidence in the data set, use of well-documented and contemporary derivation methods, transparency and documentation of the value derivation, and the thoroughness of the review process. Chemical- and exposure scenario-specific needs should determine which HHRV is most appropriate; however, a most appropriate HHRV may not be available for every chemical and situation. Therefore, we present both considerations and limitations to guide selection of an alternate HHRV based on suitability for the assessment scenario from among the available chemical-specific values.</p>","PeriodicalId":23178,"journal":{"name":"Toxicological Sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Review of Human Health Reference Values of the United States.\",\"authors\":\"George M Woodall, Sarah E Kobylewski-Saucier, Rachel M Shaffer, April M Luke, Laura M Carlson\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/toxsci/kfaf092\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Human health-based reference values (HHRVs) developed by United States (U.S.) governmental agencies and professional organizations are derived for specific purposes related to their organizational or statutory mandates, and for individual chemicals or substance groups (e.g., manganese compounds). Choosing an appropriate chemical-specific value should be based on the risk assessment need and the specific exposure context, along with a basic understanding of the various types and the intended purposes of each available HHRV. In this overview, HHRVs have been broadly organized into three main categories: Values for the general public; occupational exposure limits; and emergency response values. The goal of this overview is to equip the reader with a greater understanding of HHRVs, how they are meant to be applied, and key aspects to consider in selecting the most appropriate value. These key aspects include target population (e.g., general public of all ages vs. working-age adults), duration and frequency of exposure, health effect severity, confidence in the data set, use of well-documented and contemporary derivation methods, transparency and documentation of the value derivation, and the thoroughness of the review process. Chemical- and exposure scenario-specific needs should determine which HHRV is most appropriate; however, a most appropriate HHRV may not be available for every chemical and situation. Therefore, we present both considerations and limitations to guide selection of an alternate HHRV based on suitability for the assessment scenario from among the available chemical-specific values.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23178,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Toxicological Sciences\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Toxicological Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfaf092\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"TOXICOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Toxicological Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfaf092","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国政府机构和专业组织制定的人体健康参考值(hhrv)是为与其组织或法定任务有关的特定目的以及为个别化学品或物质类别(例如锰化合物)而得出的。应根据风险评估需要和具体的暴露环境,以及对每种可用HHRV的各种类型和预期用途的基本了解,选择适当的化学品特异性值。在这个概述中,hhrv被大致分为三个主要类别:对公众的价值;职业接触限值;以及应急响应值。这篇综述的目的是让读者更好地理解hhrv,如何应用它们,以及在选择最合适的值时要考虑的关键方面。这些关键方面包括目标人群(例如,所有年龄的普通公众与工作年龄的成年人)、接触的持续时间和频率、健康影响的严重程度、对数据集的信心、使用记录良好的现代推导方法、价值推导的透明度和文件编制,以及审查过程的彻彻性。化学品和暴露场景的特定需求应确定哪种HHRV最合适;然而,一个最合适的HHRV可能并不适用于每一种化学品和情况。因此,我们提出了考虑因素和局限性,以指导根据可用的化学特异性值对评估情景的适用性选择替代HHRV。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Review of Human Health Reference Values of the United States.

Human health-based reference values (HHRVs) developed by United States (U.S.) governmental agencies and professional organizations are derived for specific purposes related to their organizational or statutory mandates, and for individual chemicals or substance groups (e.g., manganese compounds). Choosing an appropriate chemical-specific value should be based on the risk assessment need and the specific exposure context, along with a basic understanding of the various types and the intended purposes of each available HHRV. In this overview, HHRVs have been broadly organized into three main categories: Values for the general public; occupational exposure limits; and emergency response values. The goal of this overview is to equip the reader with a greater understanding of HHRVs, how they are meant to be applied, and key aspects to consider in selecting the most appropriate value. These key aspects include target population (e.g., general public of all ages vs. working-age adults), duration and frequency of exposure, health effect severity, confidence in the data set, use of well-documented and contemporary derivation methods, transparency and documentation of the value derivation, and the thoroughness of the review process. Chemical- and exposure scenario-specific needs should determine which HHRV is most appropriate; however, a most appropriate HHRV may not be available for every chemical and situation. Therefore, we present both considerations and limitations to guide selection of an alternate HHRV based on suitability for the assessment scenario from among the available chemical-specific values.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Toxicological Sciences
Toxicological Sciences 医学-毒理学
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
7.90%
发文量
118
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: The mission of Toxicological Sciences, the official journal of the Society of Toxicology, is to publish a broad spectrum of impactful research in the field of toxicology. The primary focus of Toxicological Sciences is on original research articles. The journal also provides expert insight via contemporary and systematic reviews, as well as forum articles and editorial content that addresses important topics in the field. The scope of Toxicological Sciences is focused on a broad spectrum of impactful toxicological research that will advance the multidisciplinary field of toxicology ranging from basic research to model development and application, and decision making. Submissions will include diverse technologies and approaches including, but not limited to: bioinformatics and computational biology, biochemistry, exposure science, histopathology, mass spectrometry, molecular biology, population-based sciences, tissue and cell-based systems, and whole-animal studies. Integrative approaches that combine realistic exposure scenarios with impactful analyses that move the field forward are encouraged.
×
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