Enhancing the credibility of decisions based on scientific conclusions: Transparency is imperative

Toxicological Sciences

Volumn 116, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 5-7

  Schreider, Jay ^a   Barrow, Craig ^b   Birchfield, Norman ^c   Dearfield, Kerry ^d   Devlin, Dennis ^e   Henry, Sara ^f   Kramer, Melissa ^c   Schappelle, Seema ^c   Solomon, Keith ^g   Weed, Douglas L ^h   Embry, Michelle R ⁱ  

^a CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^b DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY   (United States)

^c U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^d U S DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE   (United States)

^e EXXONMOBIL UPSTREAM RESEARCH COMPANY   (United States)

^f CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF GUELPH   (Canada)

^h DLW Consulting Services LLC   (United States)

ⁱ ILSI HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Credibility; Criteria; Risk assessment; Scientific integrity; Transparency

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONFIDENTIALITY; DATA ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; DOCUMENTATION; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; ORGANIZATION; PEER REVIEW; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; RELIABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE;

DECISION MAKING; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; RISK MANAGEMENT;

EID: 77954376617     PISSN: 10966080     EISSN: 10960929     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/toxsci/kfq102     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). (2006). Transparency in risk assessment carried out by EFSA: guidance document on procedural aspects. EFSA Journal 353, 1-16. Available at: http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/scdoc/353.htm. Accessed January 2, 2010.
2. National Research Council (NRC). (1989). Improving Risk Communication. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
3. National Research Council (NRC). (2008). Science and Decisions. Advancing Risk Assessment. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
4. Rasmussen, B., and Jensen, K. K. (2005). The Hidden Values. Transparency in Decision-Making Processes Dealing with Hazardous Activities. Frederiksberg, Denmark: Danish Centre for Bioethics and Risk Assessment, Project Report 5.
5. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). (2000). Risk Characterization Handbook. Report nr 100-B-00-002.
6. USEPA. (May 21, 2009a). Memorandum. New Process for Development of Integrated Risk Information System Health Assessments. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/spc/pdfs/rchandbk.pdf. Accessed January 2, 2010.
7. USEPA. (October 1, 2009b). Press Release. EPA Opens Transparency Window into Pesticide Registration Decisions. Available at: http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/bd4379a92ceceeac8525735900400c27/f30b80c4057d263585257642005c9199!OpenDocument. Accessed January 2, 2010.
8. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (USFDA). (2009). FDA News Release, FDA Forms Transparency Task Force. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm163899.htm.
9. USFDA. (2002). Initiation and Conduct of All 'Major' Risk Assessments within a Risk Analysis Framework: A Report by the CFSAN Risk Analysis Working Group. Available at: http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041031125526/http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/rafw-toc.html.
10. Weed, D. L. (2005). Weight of evidence: a review of concept and methods. Risk Anal. 25, 1545-1547.
11. White House. (January 21, 2009). Presidential Documents, Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies on Transparency and Open Government. 74 Fed. Reg. 4685 (January 26, 2009). Available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/open/. Accessed January 2, 2010.