Cargando…
Assuring Access to Data for Chemical Evaluations
Background: A database for studies used for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pesticide and chemical reviews would be an excellent resource for increasing transparency and improving systematic assessments of pesticides and chemicals. There is increased demand for disclosure of raw data from...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3569693/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23229062 http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1206101 |
_version_ | 1782258946944270336 |
---|---|
author | Goldman, Lynn R. Silbergeld, Ellen K. |
author_facet | Goldman, Lynn R. Silbergeld, Ellen K. |
author_sort | Goldman, Lynn R. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: A database for studies used for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pesticide and chemical reviews would be an excellent resource for increasing transparency and improving systematic assessments of pesticides and chemicals. There is increased demand for disclosure of raw data from studies used by the U.S. EPA in these reviews. Objectives: Because the Information Quality Act (IQA) of 2001 provides an avenue for request of raw data, we reviewed all IQA requests to the U.S. EPA in 2002–2012 and the U.S. EPA’s responses. We identified other mechanisms to access such data: public access databases, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), and reanalysis by a third party. Discussion: Only two IQA requests to the U.S. EPA were for raw data. Both of these were fulfilled under FOIA, not the IQA. Barriers to the U.S. EPA’s proactive collection of all such data include costs to the U.S. EPA and researchers, significant time burdens for researchers, and major regulatory delays. The U.S. EPA regulatory authority in this area is weak, especially for research conducted in the past, not funded by the U.S. government, and/or conducted abroad. The U.S. EPA is also constrained by industry confidential business information (CBI) claims for regulatory testing data under U.S. chemical and pesticide laws. The National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials database systematically collects statistical data about clinical trials but not raw data; this database may be a model for data from studies of chemicals and pesticides. Conclusions: A database that registers studies and obtains systematic sets of parameters and results would be more feasible than a system that attempts to make all raw data available proactively. Such a proposal would not obviate rights under the IQA to obtain raw data at a later point. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3569693 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-35696932013-02-14 Assuring Access to Data for Chemical Evaluations Goldman, Lynn R. Silbergeld, Ellen K. Environ Health Perspect Commentary Background: A database for studies used for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pesticide and chemical reviews would be an excellent resource for increasing transparency and improving systematic assessments of pesticides and chemicals. There is increased demand for disclosure of raw data from studies used by the U.S. EPA in these reviews. Objectives: Because the Information Quality Act (IQA) of 2001 provides an avenue for request of raw data, we reviewed all IQA requests to the U.S. EPA in 2002–2012 and the U.S. EPA’s responses. We identified other mechanisms to access such data: public access databases, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), and reanalysis by a third party. Discussion: Only two IQA requests to the U.S. EPA were for raw data. Both of these were fulfilled under FOIA, not the IQA. Barriers to the U.S. EPA’s proactive collection of all such data include costs to the U.S. EPA and researchers, significant time burdens for researchers, and major regulatory delays. The U.S. EPA regulatory authority in this area is weak, especially for research conducted in the past, not funded by the U.S. government, and/or conducted abroad. The U.S. EPA is also constrained by industry confidential business information (CBI) claims for regulatory testing data under U.S. chemical and pesticide laws. The National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials database systematically collects statistical data about clinical trials but not raw data; this database may be a model for data from studies of chemicals and pesticides. Conclusions: A database that registers studies and obtains systematic sets of parameters and results would be more feasible than a system that attempts to make all raw data available proactively. Such a proposal would not obviate rights under the IQA to obtain raw data at a later point. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 2012-12-11 2013-02 /pmc/articles/PMC3569693/ /pubmed/23229062 http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1206101 Text en http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ Publication of EHP lies in the public domain and is therefore without copyright. All text from EHP may be reprinted freely. Use of materials published in EHP should be acknowledged (for example, ?Reproduced with permission from Environmental Health Perspectives?); pertinent reference information should be provided for the article from which the material was reproduced. Articles from EHP, especially the News section, may contain photographs or illustrations copyrighted by other commercial organizations or individuals that may not be used without obtaining prior approval from the holder of the copyright. |
spellingShingle | Commentary Goldman, Lynn R. Silbergeld, Ellen K. Assuring Access to Data for Chemical Evaluations |
title | Assuring Access to Data for Chemical Evaluations |
title_full | Assuring Access to Data for Chemical Evaluations |
title_fullStr | Assuring Access to Data for Chemical Evaluations |
title_full_unstemmed | Assuring Access to Data for Chemical Evaluations |
title_short | Assuring Access to Data for Chemical Evaluations |
title_sort | assuring access to data for chemical evaluations |
topic | Commentary |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3569693/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23229062 http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1206101 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT goldmanlynnr assuringaccesstodataforchemicalevaluations AT silbergeldellenk assuringaccesstodataforchemicalevaluations |