Bias in toxicology

Archives of Toxicology

Volumn 81, Issue 9, 2007, Pages 605-617

  Wandall, Birgitte ^a   Hansson, Sven Ove ^a   Rudén, Christina ^a  

^a ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Bias; Chemicals control; Guideline tests; Systematic errors; Toxicity testing

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; TOXICITY TESTING; TOXICOLOGY;

ANIMALS; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; RESEARCH DESIGN; TOXICOLOGY;

EID: 34547730344     PISSN: 03405761     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00204-007-0194-5     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Barnes DE, Bero LA (1998) Why review articles on the health effects of passive smoking reach different conclustions. JAMA 279(19):1566-1570
2. Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP (2003) Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research. JAMA 289(4):454-464
3. Bero LA, Rennie D (1996) Influences on the quality of published drug studies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 12(2):209-237
4. Boorman GA, Haseman JK, Waters MD, Hardisty JF, Sills RC (2002) Quality review procedures necessary for rodent pathology databases and toxicogenomic studies: The National Toxicology Program Experience. Toxicol Pathol 30(1):88-92. doi: 10.1080/01926230252824752
5. Commission Directive 2003/63/EC on Community code relating to medicinal products for human use. Official Journal no. L 159, 27/06/2003, pp 46-94
6. Correspondence about publication ethics and regulatory toxicology and pharmacology (2003). Int J Occup Environ Health 9(4):386-391 http://www.ijoeh.com/pfds/0904_Correspondence.pdf
7. Council Directive 76/768/EEC (1976) on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cosmetic products. Official Journal no-.L 262, 27/09/1976 pp. 169-200
8. Council Directive 89/107/EEC (1988) on the approximation of the laws of the Member States concerning food additives authorized for use in foodstuffs intended for human consumption Official Journal no. L 40, 11/02/1989, pp 27-33
9. Council Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market (1991) Official Journal no. L 230, 19/08/1991, pp 1-32
10. Council Directive 92/32/EEC (1992) Amending for the seventh time Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances. Official Journal, no. L 154, 05/06/1992, pp. 1-29
11. Council of the European Union (2006) Presidency Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restrictions of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency and amending Directive 1999/45/EC and Regulation (EC) on Persistent Organic Pollutants. 15921/1/05 REV 1, Brussels, 9 March 2006, available at http://www.register.consilium.eu.int
12. Council Regulation (EEC), no. 793/93 (1993) on the evaluation and control of the risks of existing substances. Official Journal, no L 84, 05/04/1993, pp 1-75
13. Council Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances (1967) Official Journal no. 196, 16/08/1967, pp 1-98
14. Crissman JW, Bus JR, Miller RR(1999) Toxicology: judge data or dollars? Environ Health Perspect 107(10): A489-491
15. Crissman JW, Goodman DG, Hildebrandt PK, Maronpot RR, Prater DA, Riley JH, Seaman WJ, Thake DC (2004) Best practices guideline: toxicologic histopathology. Toxicol Pathol 32:126-131. doi: 10.1080/01926230490268756
16. Cunningham AR, Rosenkranz HS (2001) Estimating the extent of the health hazard posed by high-production volume chemicals. Environ Health Perspect 109(9):953-956
17. DeMets DL (1999) Statistics and ethics in medical research. Sci Eng Ethics 5(1):97-117
18. Dickersin K (1990) The existence of publication bias and risk factors for its occurrence. JAMA 268(10):1385-1389
19. Dickersin K (1997) How important is publication bias? A synthesis of available data. AIDS Educ Prev 9(suppl A):15-21
20. Dickersin K, Rennie D (2003) Registering clinical trials. JAMA 290(4):516-523
21. Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (1998) concerning the placing of biocidal products on the market. Official Journal of the European Communities, L123, 24/04/1998, pp. 1-63
22. Directive 2001/20/EC of The European Parliament and of the Council (2001). Official Journal of the European Communities no. L 121, 01/05/2001, pp. 34-44
23. Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on Community code relating to medicinal products for human use (2001) Official Journal of the European Communities no. L 311, 28/11/2001, pp 67-128
24. Djulbegovic B, Lacevic M, Cantor A, Fields KK, Bennett CL, Adams JR, Kuderer NM, Lyman GH (2000) The uncertainty principle and industry-sponsored research. Lancet 356:635-638. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02605-2
25. Doucet MS, Bridge DA, Grimlund RA, Shamoo AE (1994) An application of stratified sampling techniques for research data. Account Res 3:237-247
26. Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR (1991) Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 337(8746):867-872
27. European Commission (2003). Technical Guidance Document in support of Commission Directive 93/67/EEC on Risk Assessment for new notified substances, Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 on Risk Assessment for existing substances and Directive 98/8/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of biocidal products on the market. Part 2
28. Feinleib M (1987) Biases and weak associations. Prev Med 16:150-164
29. Fletcher RW, Fletcher SW (2005) Clinical epidemiology: the essentials, 4th edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore
30. GAO (2005). Chemical regulation: options exist to improve EPA's ability to assess health risks and manage its chemical review program. Report to Congressional Requesters, GAO-05-458. ( http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrprt?GAO- 05-458 )
31. Godlee F, Dickerson K (2003) Bias, subjectivity, chance and conflict of interest in editorial decisions. In: Godlee F (ed) Peer review in health sciences, 2nd edn. BMJ Publishing Group, London, pp 91-117
32. Hansson SO, Rudén C (2006a) Evaluating the risk decision process. Toxicology 218(2-3):100-111
33. Hansson SO, Rudén C (2006b) Priority setting in the REACH system. Toxicol Sci 90(2):304-308. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfj071
34. Hansson SO, Rudén C (2007) Towards a theory of tiered testing. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol (in press)
35. Holland T (2001) A survey of discriminant methods used in toxicological histopathology. Toxicol Pathol 29(2):269-273
36. Holland T (2005) The comparative power of the discriminant methods used in toxicological pathology. Toxicol Pathol 33:490-494. doi: 10.1080/ 01926230590965382
37. IARC Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans (1980) Supplement 2
38. Kaptchuk TJ (2003) Effect of interpretive bias on research evidence. BMJ 326(7404):1453-1455. doi: 10.1136/bmj.326.7404.1453
39. Koehler JJ (1993) The influence of prior beliefs on scientific judgments of evidence quality. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 56:28-55
40. Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O (2003) Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ 326(7400):1167-1170. doi: 10.1136/bmj.326.7400.1167
41. Lynn FM (1986) The interplay of science and values in assesing and regulating environmental risks. Sci Technol Hum Values 11(2):40-50
42. Maurissen JP, Gilbert SG, Sander M, Beauchamp TL, Johnson S, Schwetz BA, Goozner M, Barrow CS (2005) In: Workshop proceedings: managing conflict of interest in science. A little consensus and a lot of controversy. Toxicol Sci 87(1) 11-14. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfi240
43. Maxwell C (1981) Clinical trials, reviews, and the journal of negative results. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1:15-18
44. Murphy EA (1978) The logic of medicine. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
45. Nordberg A, Rudén C (2007) The usefulness of the bioconcentration factor as a tool for priority setting in chemicals control. Toxicol Lett 168:113-120. doi: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2006.11.004
46. OECD guidelines for the testing of chemicals no. 451 carcinogenicity studies (adopted 12 May 1981)
47. OECD guidelines for the testing of chemicals no. 452 chronic toxicity studies (adopted 12 May 1981)
48. OECD Guidelines for the testing of chemicals no. 416 two-generation reproduction toxicity study (Updated Guideline, adopted 22 January 2001)
49. OECD (2003) Managing conflict of interest in the public service. OECD guidelines and country experiences
50. OECD (2005) Managing conflict of interest in the public sector. A toolkit
51. OECD Series on principles of good laboratory practice and compliance monitoring, no. 2 (1995) Guidance for GLP Monitoring Authorities. OCDE/GD(95)66
52. OECD series on principles of good laboratory practice and compliance monitoring, no. 1 (1998) OECD principles on good laboratory practice (as revised in 1997). ENV/MC/CHEM(98)17
53. Prasse K, Hildebrandt P, Dodd D (1986) Letter to the editor. Vet Pathol 23:540-541
54. Purchase IFH (2004) Fraud, errors and gamesmanship in experimental toxicology. Toxicology 202:1-20. doi: 10.1016/j.tox.2004.06.029
55. Resnik DB (2000a) Financial interests and research bias. Perspect Sci 8(3):255-285. doi: 10.1162/106361400750340497
56. Resnik DB (2000b) Statistics, ethics and research: an agenda for education and reform. Account Res 8:163-188
57. Rice JM (2005) The carcinogenicity of acrylamide. Mutat Res 580:3-20. doi: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2004.09.008
58. Roberts I, Kwan I, Evans P, Haig, S (2002) Does animal experimentation inform human healthcare? Observations from a systematic review of international animal experiments on fluid resucitation. BMJ 324:474-476
59. Rothman K.J (1991) The ethics of research sponsorship. J Clin Epidemiol 44(Suppl 1):S25-S28
60. Rudén C (2001) Interpretations of primary carcinogenicity data in 29 trichloroethylene risk assessments. Toxicology 169(3):209-225. doi: 10.1016/S0300-483X(01)00525-X
61. Sackett DL (1979) Bias in Analytic Research. J Chron Dis 32:51-63
62. Shamoo AE, Resnik DB (2003) Responsible conduct of research. Oxford University Press, New York
63. Silman A, MacFarlane GJ (2002) Epidemiological studies. A practical guide, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, London
64. Sterling TD (1959) Publication decisions and their possible effects on inferences drawn from tests of significance-or vice versa. J Am Stat Assoc 54(285):30-34
65. Stern JM, Simes R J (1997) Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. BMJ 315(7109):640-645
66. vom Saal FS, Welshons WV (2006) Large effects from small exposures. II. The importance of positive controls in low-dose research on bisphenol A. Environ Res 100:50-76. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2005.09.001 s
67. Weinberg AM (1972) Science and trans-science. Minerva 10:208-222. doi: 10.1007/BF01682418
68. Whitbeck C (2004) Trust and the future of research. Phys Today 57(11):48-53