Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
CRED: CRITERIA FOR REPORTING AND EVALUATING ECOTOXICITY DATA
Stockholm University, Faculty of Science, Department of Environmental Science and Analytical Chemistry.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2697-2310
Number of Authors: 42016 (English)In: Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, ISSN 0730-7268, E-ISSN 1552-8618, Vol. 35, no 5, p. 1297-1309Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Predicted-no-effect concentrations (PNECs) and environmental quality standards (EQSs) are derived in a large number of legal frameworks worldwide. When deriving these safe concentrations, it is necessary to evaluate the reliability and relevance of ecotoxicity studies. Such evaluation is often subject to expert judgment, which may introduce bias and decrease consistency when risk assessors evaluate the same study. The Criteria for Reporting and Evaluating Ecotoxicity Data (CRED) project attempts to address this problem. It aims to improve the reproducibility, transparency, and consistency of reliability and relevance evaluations of aquatic ecotoxicity studies among regulatory frameworks, countries, institutes, and individual assessors. In the present study, the CRED evaluation method is presented. It includes a set of 20 reliability and 13 relevance criteria, accompanied by extensive guidance. Risk assessors who participated in the CRED ring test evaluated the CRED evaluation method to be more accurate, applicable, consistent, and transparent than the often-used Klimisch method. The CRED evaluation method is accompanied by reporting recommendations for aquatic ecotoxicity studies, with 50 specific criteria divided into 6 categories: general information, test design, test substance, test organism, exposure conditions, and statistical design and biological response. An ecotoxicity study in which all important information is reported is more likely to be considered for regulatory use, and proper reporting may also help in the peer-review process.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. Vol. 35, no 5, p. 1297-1309
Keywords [en]
Aquatic toxicology, Reliability, Relevance, Study evaluation, Reporting recommendation
National Category
Earth and Related Environmental Sciences Pharmacology and Toxicology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-131214DOI: 10.1002/etc.3259ISI: 000374547500029PubMedID: 26399705OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-131214DiVA, id: diva2:936845
Available from: 2016-06-14 Created: 2016-06-14 Last updated: 2022-03-23Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records

Ågerstrand, Marlene

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Ågerstrand, Marlene
By organisation
Department of Environmental Science and Analytical Chemistry
In the same journal
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
Earth and Related Environmental SciencesPharmacology and Toxicology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 25 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf