Submission of scientific peer-reviewed open literature for the approval of pesticide active substances under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009

EFSA Journal

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 2011, Pages

[No Author Info available]

Author keywords

Literature search; metabolite; OECD dossier; plant protection product; relevance assessment; reliability assessment; study selection

Indexed keywords

EID: 84893448754     PISSN: None     EISSN: 18314732     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2092     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. th SETAC (Science and Technology Environmental Protection) Europe Annual Meeting, 23–27 May 2010, Seville, Spain. . Accessed 13/12/2010.
2. Becker RA, Janus ER, White RD, Kruszewski FH, Brackett RE, 2009. Good Laboratory Practices and Safety Assessments. Environmental Health Perspectives, 117, p. 482.
3. CRD (Centre for Reviews and Dissemination), 2009. Systematic Reviews, CRD's Guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. Published by CRD, University of York, January 2009, ISBN 978-1-900640-47-3.
4. Directorate-General for Agriculture, 1999. Guidelines for the generation of data concerning residues as provided in Annex II part A, section 6 and Annex II, part A, section 8 of Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market. COMMISSION OF THEEUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, 1607/VI/97 rev.2, 10/6/1999. Available from
5. Durda JL, Preziosi DV, 2000. Data quality evaluation of toxicological studies used to derive ecotoxicological benchmarks. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 6, pp. 747–765.
6. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), 2010. Application of systematic review methodology to food and feed safety assessments to support decision making. The EFSA Journal (2010), 8(5):1637, pp. 1–90.
7. EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), in progress. Guidance document to determine the toxicological relevance of metabolites of PPP active substances (Evaluation of the toxicological relevance of metabolites and degradates of pesticide active substances for dietary risk assessment). EFSA-Q-2008-756. Status on 13/05/2010: in progress. Viewed on the EFSA Register of Questions:
8. Hames I, 2007. Peer Review and Manuscript Management in Scientific Journals: Guidelines for Good Practice. Irene Hames (Eds), Blackwell, UK, pp. 293.
9. Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.2 [updated September 2009]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2009. Available from
10. Hobbs DA, Waine MJ, Markich SJ, 2005. Evaluation of criteria used to assess the quality of aquatic toxicity data. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 1, pp. 174–180.
11. ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors), 2006. Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication (updated February 2006). Available from: Accessed 13/12/2010.
12. Klimisch H, Andreae M, Tillmann U, 1997. A systematic approach for evaluating the quality of experimental toxicological and ecotoxicological data. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 25, pp. 1–5.
13. Küster A, Bachmann, J, Brandt U, Ebert I, Hickmann S, Klein-Goedicke J, Maack G, Schmitz S, Thumm E, Rechenberg B, 2009. Regulatory demands on data quality for the environmental risk assessment of pharmaceuticals. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 55, pp. 276–280.
14. Küster A, Ågerstrand M, Bachmann J, Breitholtz M, Ebert I, Rudén C, Rechenberg B, 2010. Proposal for a new reliability and relevance evaluation scheme for ecotoxicity data. POSTER presented at the 20th SETAC (Science and Technology Environmental Protection) Europe Annual Meeting, 23–27 May 2010, Seville, Spain. . Accessed 13/12/2010.
15. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), 2005. OECD Guidance for Industry Data Submissions on Plant Protection Products and their Active Substances (Dossier Guidance). Revision 2, May 2005. OECD Environment Directorate. Available from
16. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), 2006. OECD Guidance for Industry Data Submissions for Microbial Pest Control Products and their Microbial Pest Control Agents. August 2006. OECD Environment Directorate. Available from
17. RIN (Research Information Network), 2010. Peer review. A guide for researchers (March 2010). Available from: . Accessed: 13/12/2010.
18. Sampson M, McGowan J, Cogo E, Grimshaw J, Moher D, Lefebvre C, 2009. An evidence-based practice guideline for the peer review of electronic search strategies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009:62(9):944–52.
19. SANCO (Directorate General for Health and Consumer Affairs), 2003. Guidance document on the assessment of the relevance of metabolites in groundwater of substances regulated under council Directive 91/414/EEC. Sanco/221/2000 rev.10 final. 25 February 2003. Available from .
20. SANCO (Directorate General for Health and Consumer Affairs), 2005. Guideline developed within the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health on the Preparation and Presentation of Complete Dossiers for the Inclusion of Active Substances in Annex I of Directive 91/414/EEC (Article 5.3 and 8.2). Sanco/10518/2005 rev. 5. Available from .
21. Schneider K, Schwarz M, Burkholder I, Kopp-Schneider A, Edler L, Kinsner-Ovaskainen A, Hartung T, Hoffmann S, 2009. “ToxRTool”, a new tool to assess the reliability of toxicological data. Toxicology Letters 189, pp. 138–144.