An assessment of environmental health measures in the Deepwater Horizon Research Consortia

IF 3.6 Q1 TOXICOLOGY Current Opinion in Toxicology Pub Date : 2019-08-01 DOI:10.1016/j.cotox.2019.07.003
Huaqin Pan , Stephen W. Edwards , Cataia Ives , Hannah Covert , Emily W. Harville , Maureen Y. Lichtveld , Jeffrey K. Wickliffe , Carol M. Hamilton
{"title":"An assessment of environmental health measures in the Deepwater Horizon Research Consortia","authors":"Huaqin Pan ,&nbsp;Stephen W. Edwards ,&nbsp;Cataia Ives ,&nbsp;Hannah Covert ,&nbsp;Emily W. Harville ,&nbsp;Maureen Y. Lichtveld ,&nbsp;Jeffrey K. Wickliffe ,&nbsp;Carol M. Hamilton","doi":"10.1016/j.cotox.2019.07.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Research consortia play a key role in our understanding of how environmental exposures influence health and wellbeing, especially in the case of catastrophic events such as the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. A common challenge that prevents the optimal use of these data is the difficulty of harmonizing data regarding the environmental exposures and health effects across the studies within and among consortia. A review of the measures used by members of the Deepwater Horizon Research Consortia highlights the challenges associated with balancing timely implementation of a study to support disaster relief with optimizing the long-term value of the data. The inclusion of common, standard measures at the study design phase and <em>a priori</em> discussions regarding harmonization of study-specific measures among consortia members are key to overcoming this challenge. As more resources become available to support the use of standard measures, researchers now have the tools needed to rapidly coordinate their studies without compromising research focus or timely completion of the original study goals.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37736,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Toxicology","volume":"16 ","pages":"Pages 75-82"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.cotox.2019.07.003","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468202018300937","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Research consortia play a key role in our understanding of how environmental exposures influence health and wellbeing, especially in the case of catastrophic events such as the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. A common challenge that prevents the optimal use of these data is the difficulty of harmonizing data regarding the environmental exposures and health effects across the studies within and among consortia. A review of the measures used by members of the Deepwater Horizon Research Consortia highlights the challenges associated with balancing timely implementation of a study to support disaster relief with optimizing the long-term value of the data. The inclusion of common, standard measures at the study design phase and a priori discussions regarding harmonization of study-specific measures among consortia members are key to overcoming this challenge. As more resources become available to support the use of standard measures, researchers now have the tools needed to rapidly coordinate their studies without compromising research focus or timely completion of the original study goals.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
深水地平线研究联盟环境健康措施评估
研究联盟在我们理解环境暴露如何影响健康和福祉方面发挥了关键作用,特别是在深水地平线石油泄漏等灾难性事件的情况下。阻碍这些数据得到最佳利用的一个共同挑战是,难以协调各财团内部和各财团之间关于环境暴露和健康影响的研究数据。对深水地平线研究联盟成员使用的措施进行了回顾,强调了在及时实施研究以支持救灾与优化数据的长期价值之间取得平衡所面临的挑战。在研究设计阶段纳入共同的标准措施,并在财团成员之间先验地讨论如何协调研究特定措施,是克服这一挑战的关键。随着越来越多的资源可用于支持使用标准措施,研究人员现在拥有了快速协调研究所需的工具,而不会影响研究重点或及时完成最初的研究目标。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Current Opinion in Toxicology
Current Opinion in Toxicology Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Toxicology
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: The aims and scope of Current Opinion in Toxicology is to systematically provide the reader with timely and provocative views and opinions of the highest qualified and recognized experts on current advances in selected topics within the field of toxicology. The goal is that Current Opinion in Toxicology will be an invaluable source of information and perspective for researchers, teachers, managers and administrators, policy makers and students. Division of the subject into sections: For this purpose, the scope of Toxicology is divided into six selected high impact themed sections, each of which is reviewed once a year: Mechanistic Toxicology, Metabolic Toxicology, Risk assessment in Toxicology, Genomic Toxicology, Systems Toxicology, Translational Toxicology.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Mixture toxicity: A hot topic in toxicology and chemical risk assessment Editorial: Guardians of Tomorrow: Developmental Toxicology for Future Generations Editorial: Role of the microbiome in toxicology How single-cell transcriptomics provides insight on hepatic responses to TCDD
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1