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
Comparison of four different methods for reliability evaluation of ecotoxicity data: a case study of non-standard test data used in environmental risk assessments of pharmaceutical substances
Royal Institute of Technology/Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan, Sweden.
Stockholm University, Faculty of Science, Department of Applied Environmental Science (ITM).
Royal Institute of Technology/Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan, Sweden.
2011 (English)In: Environmental Sciences Europe, ISSN 2190-4707, E-ISSN 2190-4715, Vol. 23, no 17Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background

Standard test data are still preferred and recommended for regulatory environmental risk assessments of pharmaceuticals even though data generated by non-standard tests could improve the scientific basis of risk assessments by providing relevant and more sensitive endpoints.

The aim of this study was to investigate if non-standard ecotoxicity data can be evaluated systematically in risk assessments of pharmaceuticals. This has been done by evaluating the usefulness of four reliability evaluation methods, and by investigating whether recently published non-standard ecotoxicity studies from the open scientific literature fulfill the criteria that these methods propose.

Results

The same test data were evaluated differently by the four methods in seven out of nine cases. The selected non-standard test data were considered reliable/acceptable in only 14 out of 36 cases.

Conclusions

The four evaluation methods differ in scope, user friendliness, and how criteria are weighted and summarized. This affected the outcome of the data evaluation.

The results suggest that there is room for improvements in how data are reported in the open scientific literature. Reliability evaluation criteria could be used as a checklist to ensure that all important aspects are reported and thereby increasing the possibility that the data could be used for regulatory risk assessment.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2011. Vol. 23, no 17
Keywords [en]
Chemical Oxygen Demand, Environmental Risk Assessment, Good Laboratory Practice, Acceptability Criterion, Evaluation Question
National Category
Environmental Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:su:diva-151095DOI: 10.1186/2190-4715-23-17OAI: oai:DiVA.org:su-151095DiVA, id: diva2:1171977
Available from: 2018-01-08 Created: 2018-01-08 Last updated: 2018-05-21Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Ågerstrand, MarleneBreitholtz, MagnusRudén, Christina
By organisation
Department of Applied Environmental Science (ITM)
In the same journal
Environmental Sciences Europe
Environmental Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 3 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