Suppr超能文献

毒理学风险评估与管理中的数据库选择

Data base selection in toxicological risk assessment and management.

作者信息

Kamrin M A

机构信息

Center for Environmental Toxicology, Michigan State University, East Lansing 48824-1206.

出版信息

Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 1990 Jun;11(3):308-13. doi: 10.1016/0273-2300(90)90029-b.

Abstract

In recent years, there has been increasing awareness of the differences in maximum allowable levels developed by the various federal regulatory agencies. It has generally been presumed that the variation in levels arises from differences in risk management decisions, i.e., how the data are used. This study was undertaken to test the hypothesis that differences in choice of data to utilize also have a significant impact on interagency variation. To test this hypothesis, a comparison was made between the data bases used by the EPA Office of Drinking Water and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration in setting maximum levels for pesticides in drinking water and workplace air, respectively. The results show that the same data are only infrequently used as bases for both types of regulatory levels. The study also indicates that the differences in data selection cannot be ascribed to factors related to the applicability of different data for the two types of exposures--drinking water and workplace air. There are essentially no differences in the data with respect to route of exposure, species (laboratory animals vs humans), or length of exposure. No obvious scientific basis for the differences was found. Other possible selection factors are discussed.

摘要

近年来,人们越来越意识到各联邦监管机构制定的最大允许水平存在差异。一般认为,水平差异源于风险管理决策的不同,即数据的使用方式。本研究旨在检验这一假设:所使用数据选择的差异也会对机构间的差异产生重大影响。为验证这一假设,对美国环境保护局饮用水办公室和职业安全与健康管理局在分别设定饮用水和工作场所空气中农药最大水平时所使用的数据库进行了比较。结果表明,很少有相同的数据被用作这两种监管水平的依据。该研究还表明,数据选择的差异不能归因于与不同数据对饮用水和工作场所空气这两种暴露类型的适用性相关的因素。就暴露途径、物种(实验动物与人类)或暴露时长而言,数据基本没有差异。未发现差异存在明显的科学依据。文中还讨论了其他可能的选择因素。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验