Cargando…
A scoping review of evaluations of and recommendations for default uncertainty factors in human health risk assessment
Uncertainty factors (UFs) are used to account for uncertainties and variability when setting exposure limits or guidance values. Starting from a proposal of a single UF of 100 to extrapolate from an animal NOAEL to a human acceptable exposure, the aspects of uncertainty and number of UFs have divers...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10087398/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36017531 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jat.4386 |
_version_ | 1785022337765081088 |
---|---|
author | Johanson, Gunnar Moto, Tshepo Paulsen Schenk, Linda |
author_facet | Johanson, Gunnar Moto, Tshepo Paulsen Schenk, Linda |
author_sort | Johanson, Gunnar |
collection | PubMed |
description | Uncertainty factors (UFs) are used to account for uncertainties and variability when setting exposure limits or guidance values. Starting from a proposal of a single UF of 100 to extrapolate from an animal NOAEL to a human acceptable exposure, the aspects of uncertainty and number of UFs have diversified and today there are several risk assessment guidelines that contain schemes of default UFs of varying complexity. In the present work, we scoped the scientific literature on default UFs to map developments regarding recommendations and evaluations of these. We identified 91 publications making recommendations for one or several UFs and 55 publications evaluating UFs without making explicit recommendations about numerical values; these were published between 1954 and 2021. The 2000s was the decade with the largest number of publications, interspecies differences and intraspecies variability being the most frequent topics. The academic sector has been the most active (76 out of 146 publications). Authors from the private sector more often presented UF recommendations, but differences between sectors regarding size of recommendations were not statistically significant. The empirical underpinning of the reviewed recommendations ranges from four to 462 chemicals, that is, relatively low numbers compared with the range of chemicals these default UFs are expected to cover. The recommended UFs have remained remarkably constant, with merely a slight decrease over time. Although chemical specific UFs are preferable, the widespread use of default UFs warrants further attention regarding their empirical and normative basis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10087398 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100873982023-04-12 A scoping review of evaluations of and recommendations for default uncertainty factors in human health risk assessment Johanson, Gunnar Moto, Tshepo Paulsen Schenk, Linda J Appl Toxicol Review Articles Uncertainty factors (UFs) are used to account for uncertainties and variability when setting exposure limits or guidance values. Starting from a proposal of a single UF of 100 to extrapolate from an animal NOAEL to a human acceptable exposure, the aspects of uncertainty and number of UFs have diversified and today there are several risk assessment guidelines that contain schemes of default UFs of varying complexity. In the present work, we scoped the scientific literature on default UFs to map developments regarding recommendations and evaluations of these. We identified 91 publications making recommendations for one or several UFs and 55 publications evaluating UFs without making explicit recommendations about numerical values; these were published between 1954 and 2021. The 2000s was the decade with the largest number of publications, interspecies differences and intraspecies variability being the most frequent topics. The academic sector has been the most active (76 out of 146 publications). Authors from the private sector more often presented UF recommendations, but differences between sectors regarding size of recommendations were not statistically significant. The empirical underpinning of the reviewed recommendations ranges from four to 462 chemicals, that is, relatively low numbers compared with the range of chemicals these default UFs are expected to cover. The recommended UFs have remained remarkably constant, with merely a slight decrease over time. Although chemical specific UFs are preferable, the widespread use of default UFs warrants further attention regarding their empirical and normative basis. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-09-13 2023-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10087398/ /pubmed/36017531 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jat.4386 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Applied Toxicology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | Review Articles Johanson, Gunnar Moto, Tshepo Paulsen Schenk, Linda A scoping review of evaluations of and recommendations for default uncertainty factors in human health risk assessment |
title | A scoping review of evaluations of and recommendations for default uncertainty factors in human health risk assessment |
title_full | A scoping review of evaluations of and recommendations for default uncertainty factors in human health risk assessment |
title_fullStr | A scoping review of evaluations of and recommendations for default uncertainty factors in human health risk assessment |
title_full_unstemmed | A scoping review of evaluations of and recommendations for default uncertainty factors in human health risk assessment |
title_short | A scoping review of evaluations of and recommendations for default uncertainty factors in human health risk assessment |
title_sort | scoping review of evaluations of and recommendations for default uncertainty factors in human health risk assessment |
topic | Review Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10087398/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36017531 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jat.4386 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT johansongunnar ascopingreviewofevaluationsofandrecommendationsfordefaultuncertaintyfactorsinhumanhealthriskassessment AT mototshepopaulsen ascopingreviewofevaluationsofandrecommendationsfordefaultuncertaintyfactorsinhumanhealthriskassessment AT schenklinda ascopingreviewofevaluationsofandrecommendationsfordefaultuncertaintyfactorsinhumanhealthriskassessment AT johansongunnar scopingreviewofevaluationsofandrecommendationsfordefaultuncertaintyfactorsinhumanhealthriskassessment AT mototshepopaulsen scopingreviewofevaluationsofandrecommendationsfordefaultuncertaintyfactorsinhumanhealthriskassessment AT schenklinda scopingreviewofevaluationsofandrecommendationsfordefaultuncertaintyfactorsinhumanhealthriskassessment |