The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment
Abstract
At the request of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Research Council (NRC) recently completed a major report, Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment, that is intended to strengthen the scientific basis, credibility, and effectiveness of risk assessment practices and subsequent risk management decisions. The report describes the challenges faced by risk assessment and the need to consider improvements in both the technical analyses of risk assessments (i.e., the development and use of scientific information to improve risk characterization) and the utility of risk assessments (i.e., making assessments more relevant and useful for risk management decisions). The report tackles a number of topics relating to improvements in the process, including the design and framing of risk assessments, uncertainty and variability characterization, selection and use of defaults, unification of cancer and noncancer dose-response assessment, cumulative risk assessment, and the need to increase EPA's capacity to address these improvements. This article describes and summarizes the NRC report, with an eye toward its implications for risk assessment practices at EPA.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
If Cumulative Risk Assessment Is the Answer, What Is the Question?
Callahan, M. A., & Sexton, K. (2007) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.9330 · Cited by 149
Cited by
Neurobehavioural effects of developmental toxicity
Grandjean, P., & Landrigan, P. J. (2014) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(13)70278-3 · Cited by 1,886
State-of-the-science of endocrine disrupting chemicals, 2012
Bergman, Å., Heindel, J., Jobling, S., Kidd, K., & Zoeller, R. T. (2012) · Toxicology Letters · doi:10.1016/j.toxlet.2012.03.020 · Cited by 1,388
Global burden of aflatoxin-induced hepatocellular carcinoma: A risk assessment
Liu, Y., & Wu, F. (2010) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.0901388 · Cited by 1,224
Environmental chemicals in pregnant women in the United States: NHANES 2003–2004
Woodruff, T. J., Zota, A. R., & Schwartz, J. M. (2011) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.1002727 · Cited by 930
Woodruff, T. J., & Sutton, P. (2014) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.1307175 · Cited by 427
Metadata
- Authors
- Abt, E., Rodricks, J. V., Levy, J. I., Zeise, L., & Burke, T. A.
- Venue
- Risk Analysis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-04-08
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1028-1036
- ISSN
- 0272-4332 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-6924
- OpenAlex
- W2116204677
- Cited by
- 642
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 219.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01426.x
- The paper
- Abt, E., Rodricks, J. V., Levy, J. I., Zeise, L., & Burke, T. A. (2010). Science and Decisions: Advancing Risk Assessment. Risk Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01426.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.