Why and how to combine evidence in environmental assessments: Weighing evidence and building cases

Suter, Glenn W.; Cormier, Susan M.

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.12.029

Cited by 78 publications

(60 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Contrary to IARC's conclusion that there is strong evidence of genotoxicity, the Expert Panel's WoE analysis of the complete database (or the IARC subset alone) using the weighting categories proposed in Suter and Cormier (2011) indicates that glyphosate and GBFs should not be classified as genotoxic. The panel does not agree with IARC's conclusion of moderate evidence for genotoxicity of AMPA.…”

Section: Genotoxicity Classification and Moamentioning

confidence: 80%

“…While numerous attempts to develop a standard WoE method to evaluate large, complex data sets have not found universal acceptance, some critical performance requirements for WoE approaches have been identified by the US EPA (Suter & Cormier 2011). One of the most important requirements is that individual test methods should be assigned a weight that is consistent with their contribution to the overall evidence, and different types of evidence or evidence categories must be weighted before they are combined into a WoE.…”

Section: Methods Applicable To Evaluation and Interpretation Of Complmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Genotoxicity Expert Panel review: weight of evidence evaluation of the genotoxicity of glyphosate, glyphosate-based formulations, and aminomethylphosphonic acid

Brusick¹,

Aardema²,

Kier

et al. 2016

Critical Reviews in Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

published a monograph concluding there was strong evidence for genotoxicity of glyphosate and glyphosate formulations and moderate evidence for genotoxicity of the metabolite aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA). These conclusions contradicted earlier extensive reviews supporting the lack of genotoxicity of glyphosate and glyphosate formulations. The IARC Monograph concluded there was strong evidence of induction of oxidative stress by glyphosate, glyphosate formulations, and AMPA. The Expert Panel reviewed the genotoxicity and oxidative stress data considered in the IARC Monograph, together with other available data not considered by IARC. The Expert Panel defined and used a weight of evidence (WoE) approach that included ranking of studies and endpoints by the strength of their linkage to events associated with carcinogenic mechanisms. Importantly, the Expert Panel concluded that there was sufficient information available from a very large number of regulatory genotoxicity studies that should have been considered by IARC. The WoE approach, the inclusion of all relevant regulatory studies, and some differences in interpretation of individual studies led to significantly different conclusions by the Expert Panel compared with the IARC Monograph. The Expert Panel concluded that glyphosate, glyphosate formulations, and AMPA do not pose a genotoxic hazard and the data do not support the IARC Monograph genotoxicity evaluation. With respect to carcinogenicity classification and mechanism, the Expert Panel concluded that evidence relating to an oxidative stress mechanism of carcinogenicity was largely unconvincing and that the data profiles were not consistent with the characteristics of genotoxic carcinogens. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Section: Genotoxicity Classification and Moamentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: Methods Applicable To Evaluation and Interpretation Of Complmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genotoxicity Expert Panel review: weight of evidence evaluation of the genotoxicity of glyphosate, glyphosate-based formulations, and aminomethylphosphonic acid

Brusick¹,

Aardema²,

Kier

et al. 2016

Critical Reviews in Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hence, we can only hypothesize causal relationships, refute some, and determine how well the evidence supports others [3]. We believe that this is best done by a consistent and transparent process of weighing the available and relevant evidence [13]. In fact, we believe that most published reports of field studies describe associations and that the present study is one of the few that demonstrates that the relationship is causal.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…A key feature of the process is the weighting and weighing of evidence [3,13]. The evidence is weighted using a system of plus (þ) for supporting conductivity as a cause, minus (À) for weakening, and zero (0) for no effect.…”

Section: Causal Assessment Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing causation of the extirpation of stream macroinvertebrates by a mixture of ions

Cormier¹,

Suter²,

Zheng³

et al. 2012

Enviro Toxic and Chemistry

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Increased ionic concentrations are associated with the impairment of benthic invertebrate assemblages. However, the causal nature of that relationship must be demonstrated so that it can be used to derive a benchmark for conductivity. The available evidence is organized in terms of six characteristics of causation: co-occurrence, preceding causation, interaction, alteration, sufficiency, and time order. The inferential approach is to weight the lines of evidence using a consistent scoring system, weigh the evidence for each causal characteristic, and then assess the body of evidence. Through this assessment, the authors found that a mixture containing the ions Ca þ , Mg þ , HCO À 3 , and SO À 4 , as measured by conductivity, is a common cause of extirpation of aquatic macroinvertebrates in Appalachia where surface coal mining is prevalent. The mixture of ions is implicated as the cause rather than any individual constituent of the mixture. The authors also expect that ionic concentrations sufficient to cause extirpations would occur with a similar salt mixture containing predominately HCO À 3 , SO 2À 4 , Ca 2þ , and Mg 2þ in other regions with naturally low conductivity. This case demonstrates the utility of the method for determining whether relationships identified in the field are causal. Environ. Toxicol.

show abstract

“…Epidemiologists have addressed this problem by weighing evidence of causation in terms of lists of considerations [1,2], and that approach has been applied to ecological inferences [3][4][5][6][7]. Ecoepidemiologists tend to be concerned with specific causation (what is the cause of impairment of a particular population or ecosystem?).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A method for assessing causation of field exposure–response relationships

Cormier

Suter

2013

Enviro Toxic and Chemistry

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Because associations between agents and environmental effects are not necessarily causal, it is necessary to assess causation before using such relationships in environmental management. The authors adapted epidemiological methods to assess general causal hypotheses. General causation establishes that an agent is capable of causing an effect. The method uses all relevant and good-quality evidence in a weight-of-evidence system. The system is credible due to its explicit a priori criteria. The evidence is organized in terms of six characteristics of causation: co-occurrence, preceding causation, interaction, alteration, sufficiency, and time order. The causal assessment proceeds through six steps that generate, organize, and score evidence to determine whether causation is adequately supported by the body of evidence. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2013;32:272-276. # 2012 SETAC

show abstract

Why and how to combine evidence in environmental assessments: Weighing evidence and building cases

Cited by 78 publications

References 42 publications

Genotoxicity Expert Panel review: weight of evidence evaluation of the genotoxicity of glyphosate, glyphosate-based formulations, and aminomethylphosphonic acid

Genotoxicity Expert Panel review: weight of evidence evaluation of the genotoxicity of glyphosate, glyphosate-based formulations, and aminomethylphosphonic acid

Assessing causation of the extirpation of stream macroinvertebrates by a mixture of ions

A method for assessing causation of field exposure–response relationships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About