a Department of Epidemiology , Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University , Atlanta , GA , USA.
b Department of Applied Mathematics & Statistics , The Johns Hopkins University , Baltimore , MD , USA.
Crit Rev Toxicol. 2018 Jan;48(1):1-51. doi: 10.1080/10408444.2017.1350138. Epub 2017 Jul 25.
The ability of epidemiologic evidence to inform regulatory decisions is largely dependent on the coherence and quality of the published literature. This systematic review examines the quality and consistency of studies assessing health outcomes associated with exposure to triclosan (TCS), an antimicrobial chemical with a short physiologic half-life. We used elements of the Biomonitoring, Environmental Epidemiology, and Short-Lived Chemicals instrument to evaluate aspects of study quality. Each methodological domain - overall design, exposure assessment, and data analysis - was categorized according to three tiers where Tier 1 indicated the highest quality. We also examined consistency of methods, results and reporting as considerations for weight of evidence (WOE) assessment. Studies were considered sufficiently comparable if they addressed the same or similar research questions. Forty-two studies met the criteria for inclusion. Only one randomized cross-over clinical trial of TCS was assigned to Tier 1 for all three domains. Most other studies were assigned to Tier 3 for at least one domain. Although the available literature examined more than 100 different health endpoints and reported hundreds of different measures of association, few studies were considered comparable. For reported measures of association, most were not significantly different from the null; the few statistically significant results represented isolated findings without a discernable across- or within-study pattern. We conclude that the current body of epidemiologic literature does not allow a meaningful WOE assessment due to methodological limitations of individual studies and lack of inter-study consistency. On the other hand, methodologically stronger studies may be used to inform future research.
流行病学证据对监管决策的影响在很大程度上取决于已发表文献的一致性和质量。本系统评价检查了评估与三氯生(TCS)暴露相关健康结果的研究的质量和一致性,三氯生是一种具有短期生理半衰期的抗菌化学物质。我们使用生物监测、环境流行病学和短寿命化学物质工具的要素来评估研究质量的各个方面。每个方法学领域——总体设计、暴露评估和数据分析——都根据三个层次进行分类,其中第 1 层表示最高质量。我们还检查了方法、结果和报告的一致性,作为证据权重(WOE)评估的考虑因素。如果研究解决了相同或类似的研究问题,则认为它们具有足够的可比性。有 42 项研究符合纳入标准。只有一项关于 TCS 的随机交叉临床试验在所有三个领域均被评为 1 级。大多数其他研究至少在一个领域被评为 3 级。尽管可用的文献检查了超过 100 个不同的健康终点,并报告了数百种不同的关联衡量标准,但很少有研究被认为是可比的。对于报告的关联衡量标准,大多数与零值没有显著差异;少数具有统计学意义的结果代表孤立的发现,没有明显的跨研究或研究内模式。我们得出结论,由于个别研究的方法学限制和缺乏研究间的一致性,目前的流行病学文献不足以进行有意义的 WOE 评估。另一方面,方法学更强的研究可用于为未来的研究提供信息。