↓ Skip to main content

Current limitations and recommendations to improve testing for the environmental assessment of endocrine active substances

Overview of attention for article published in Integrated Environmental Assessment & Management, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#32 of 625)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Current limitations and recommendations to improve testing for the environmental assessment of endocrine active substances
Published in
Integrated Environmental Assessment & Management, January 2017
DOI 10.1002/ieam.1862
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katherine K Coady, Ronald C Biever, Nancy D Denslow, Melanie Gross, Patrick D Guiney, Henrik Holbech, Natalie K Karouna-Renier, Ioanna Katsiadaki, Hank Krueger, Steven L Levine, Gerd Maack, Mike Williams, Jeffrey C Wolf, Gerald T Ankley

Abstract

In this paper existing regulatory frameworks and test systems for assessing potential endocrine-active chemicals are described, and associated challenges discussed, along with proposed approaches to address these challenges. Regulatory frameworks vary somewhat across geographies, but all basically evaluate whether a chemical possesses endocrine activity and whether this activity can result in adverse outcomes either to humans or the environment. Current test systems include in silico, in vitro and in vivo techniques focused on detecting potential endocrine activity, and in vivo tests that collect apical data to detect possible adverse effects. These test systems are currently designed to robustly assess endocrine activity and/or adverse effects in the estrogen, androgen, and thyroid hormone signaling pathways; however, there are some limitations of current test systems for evaluating endocrine hazard and risk. These limitations include a lack of certainty regarding: 1) adequately sensitive species and life-stages, 2) mechanistic endpoints that are diagnostic for endocrine pathways of concern, and 3) the linkage between mechanistic responses and apical, adverse outcomes. Furthermore, some existing test methods are resource intensive in regard to time, cost, and use of animals. However, based on recent experiences, there are opportunities to improve approaches to, and guidance for existing test methods, and reduce uncertainty. For example, in vitro high throughput screening could be used to prioritize chemicals for testing and provide insights as to the most appropriate assay(s) for characterizing hazard and risk. Other recommendations include adding endpoints for elucidating connections between mechanistic effects and adverse outcomes, identifying potentially sensitive taxa for which test methods currently do not exist, and addressing key endocrine pathways of possible concern in addition to those associated with estrogen, androgen and thyroid signaling. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 30%
Other 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Researcher 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 5 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 10 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 22%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 6 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 September 2019.
All research outputs
#1,507,705
of 13,643,882 outputs
Outputs from Integrated Environmental Assessment & Management
#32
of 625 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,739
of 288,636 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Integrated Environmental Assessment & Management
#3
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,643,882 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 625 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 288,636 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.