关于将流行病学更好地纳入定量风险评估的考虑

Sandrine E. Déglin , Igor Burstyn , Connie L. Chen , David J. Miller , Matthew O. Gribble , Ali K. Hamade , Ellen T. Chang , Raghavendhran Avanasi , Denali Boon , Jennifer Reed
{"title":"关于将流行病学更好地纳入定量风险评估的考虑","authors":"Sandrine E. Déglin ,&nbsp;Igor Burstyn ,&nbsp;Connie L. Chen ,&nbsp;David J. Miller ,&nbsp;Matthew O. Gribble ,&nbsp;Ali K. Hamade ,&nbsp;Ellen T. Chang ,&nbsp;Raghavendhran Avanasi ,&nbsp;Denali Boon ,&nbsp;Jennifer Reed","doi":"10.1016/j.gloepi.2022.100084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Environmental epidemiology has proven critical to study various associations between environmental exposures and adverse human health effects. However, there is a perception that it often does not sufficiently inform quantitative risk assessment. To help address this concern, in 2017, the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute initiated a project engaging the epidemiology, exposure science, and risk assessment communities with tripartite representation from government agencies, industry, and academia, in a dialogue on the use of environmental epidemiology for quantitative risk assessment and public health decision making. As part of this project, four meetings attended by experts in epidemiology, exposure science, toxicology, statistics, and risk assessment, as well as one additional meeting engaging funding agencies, were organized to explore incentives and barriers to realizing the full potential of epidemiological data in quantitative risk assessment. A set of questions was shared with workshop participants prior to the meetings, and two case studies were used to support the discussion.</p><p>Five key ideas emerged from these meetings as areas of desired improvement to ensure that human data can more consistently become an integral part of quantitative risk assessment: 1) reducing confirmation and publication bias, 2) increasing communication with funding agencies to raise awareness of research needs, 3) developing alternative funding channels targeted to support quantitative risk assessment, 4) making data available for reuse and analysis, and 5) developing cross-disciplinary and cross-sectoral interactions, collaborations, and training.</p><p>We explored and integrated these themes into a roadmap illustrating the need for a multi-stakeholder effort to ensure that epidemiological data can fully contribute to the quantitative evaluation of human health risks, and to build confidence in a reliable decision-making process that leverages the totality of scientific evidence.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36311,"journal":{"name":"Global Epidemiology","volume":"4 ","pages":"Article 100084"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10445996/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Considerations towards the better integration of epidemiology into quantitative risk assessment\",\"authors\":\"Sandrine E. Déglin ,&nbsp;Igor Burstyn ,&nbsp;Connie L. Chen ,&nbsp;David J. Miller ,&nbsp;Matthew O. Gribble ,&nbsp;Ali K. Hamade ,&nbsp;Ellen T. Chang ,&nbsp;Raghavendhran Avanasi ,&nbsp;Denali Boon ,&nbsp;Jennifer Reed\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.gloepi.2022.100084\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Environmental epidemiology has proven critical to study various associations between environmental exposures and adverse human health effects. However, there is a perception that it often does not sufficiently inform quantitative risk assessment. To help address this concern, in 2017, the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute initiated a project engaging the epidemiology, exposure science, and risk assessment communities with tripartite representation from government agencies, industry, and academia, in a dialogue on the use of environmental epidemiology for quantitative risk assessment and public health decision making. As part of this project, four meetings attended by experts in epidemiology, exposure science, toxicology, statistics, and risk assessment, as well as one additional meeting engaging funding agencies, were organized to explore incentives and barriers to realizing the full potential of epidemiological data in quantitative risk assessment. A set of questions was shared with workshop participants prior to the meetings, and two case studies were used to support the discussion.</p><p>Five key ideas emerged from these meetings as areas of desired improvement to ensure that human data can more consistently become an integral part of quantitative risk assessment: 1) reducing confirmation and publication bias, 2) increasing communication with funding agencies to raise awareness of research needs, 3) developing alternative funding channels targeted to support quantitative risk assessment, 4) making data available for reuse and analysis, and 5) developing cross-disciplinary and cross-sectoral interactions, collaborations, and training.</p><p>We explored and integrated these themes into a roadmap illustrating the need for a multi-stakeholder effort to ensure that epidemiological data can fully contribute to the quantitative evaluation of human health risks, and to build confidence in a reliable decision-making process that leverages the totality of scientific evidence.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36311,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Epidemiology\",\"volume\":\"4 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100084\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10445996/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590113322000141\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590113322000141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

环境流行病学已被证明对研究环境暴露与人类健康不良影响之间的各种关联至关重要。然而,有一种看法认为,它往往不能充分地为定量风险评估提供信息。为了帮助解决这一问题,2017年,健康与环境科学研究所启动了一个项目,由政府机构、工业界和学术界三方代表参与,让流行病学、暴露科学和风险评估界参与对话,讨论利用环境流行病学进行定量风险评估和公共卫生决策。作为该项目的一部分,组织了四次由流行病学、接触科学、毒理学、统计学和风险评估专家参加的会议,以及另一次由供资机构参加的会议,以探讨在定量风险评估中充分发挥流行病学数据潜力的激励因素和障碍。在会议之前,与研讨会参与者分享了一系列问题,并使用了两个案例研究来支持讨论。这些会议提出了五个关键的想法,作为希望改进的领域,以确保人类数据能够更一致地成为定量风险评估的组成部分:1)减少确认和发表偏倚;2)增加与资助机构的沟通,以提高对研究需求的认识;3)开发可替代的资助渠道,以支持定量风险评估;4)使数据可用于重用和分析;5)发展跨学科和跨部门的互动、合作和培训。我们对这些主题进行了探讨,并将其纳入一个路线图,说明需要多方利益攸关方共同努力,确保流行病学数据能够充分促进人类健康风险的定量评估,并建立对利用全面科学证据的可靠决策进程的信心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Considerations towards the better integration of epidemiology into quantitative risk assessment

Environmental epidemiology has proven critical to study various associations between environmental exposures and adverse human health effects. However, there is a perception that it often does not sufficiently inform quantitative risk assessment. To help address this concern, in 2017, the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute initiated a project engaging the epidemiology, exposure science, and risk assessment communities with tripartite representation from government agencies, industry, and academia, in a dialogue on the use of environmental epidemiology for quantitative risk assessment and public health decision making. As part of this project, four meetings attended by experts in epidemiology, exposure science, toxicology, statistics, and risk assessment, as well as one additional meeting engaging funding agencies, were organized to explore incentives and barriers to realizing the full potential of epidemiological data in quantitative risk assessment. A set of questions was shared with workshop participants prior to the meetings, and two case studies were used to support the discussion.

Five key ideas emerged from these meetings as areas of desired improvement to ensure that human data can more consistently become an integral part of quantitative risk assessment: 1) reducing confirmation and publication bias, 2) increasing communication with funding agencies to raise awareness of research needs, 3) developing alternative funding channels targeted to support quantitative risk assessment, 4) making data available for reuse and analysis, and 5) developing cross-disciplinary and cross-sectoral interactions, collaborations, and training.

We explored and integrated these themes into a roadmap illustrating the need for a multi-stakeholder effort to ensure that epidemiological data can fully contribute to the quantitative evaluation of human health risks, and to build confidence in a reliable decision-making process that leverages the totality of scientific evidence.

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
Global Epidemiology
Global Epidemiology Medicine-Infectious Diseases
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
39 days
期刊最新文献
Academic performance and associated factors among female university students Exploring diseases burden in HIV population: Results from the CHAO (Comorbidities in HIV/AIDS outpatients) cross-sectional study in Kenya What constitutes valid evidence of causation? Gas stoves and childhood asthma revisited Letter to the editor regarding: “Challenging unverified assumptions in causal claims: Do gas stoves increase risk of pediatric asthma?” Identification of population multimorbidity patterns in 3.9 million patients from Bogota in 2018
×
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:481959085
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