Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Implementing Systematic Review at the National Toxicology Program: Status and Next Steps

      editorial

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The National Toxicology Program (NTP), an interagency program headquartered at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), carries out a broad range of toxicology research and testing and serves as a resource for identification of substances in our environment that are hazards for human health. One of the ways that the NTP identifies hazards is through carrying out literature-based health assessments. Approximately 2 years ago we began exploring systematic-review methodology as a means to enhance transparency and increase efficiency in summarizing and synthesizing findings from studies in our literature-based health assessments. A systematic review uses an explicit, prespecified approach to identify, select, assess, and appraise the data from studies that focus on addressing a specific scientific question (Institute of Medicine 2011). Although traditionally used to grade the quality of evidence and strength of scientific support for recommendations for clinical practice guidelines and healthcare interventions [Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) 2012; Guyatt et al. 2011; Higgins and Green 2011], we—and others—were interested in how systematic review methodology might be applied to environmental health questions (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry 2012; National Research Council 2011; Silbergeld and Scherer 2013; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2013; Woodruff and Sutton 2011). With the establishment of the Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT) in 2011, the NIEHS launched a new problem-solving resource for the NTP, particularly with respect to identification of noncancer hazards in our environment (Bucher et al. 2011). OHAT took the lead in investigating how systematic review methodology might be used by the NTP. We embraced systematic review methodology as a useful approach for providing thorough documentation of the steps, inputs, and decisions in a literature-based evaluation. However, we also recognized the necessity to extend existing systematic review methods to accommodate our need in environmental health to integrate data from multiple evidence streams (human, animal, in vitro) and focus on observational human studies rather than on the randomized clinical trials more commonly encountered in the field of health-care intervention (NTP 2012a, 2012b). In late February 2013, the NTP released the Draft OHAT Approach for Systematic Review and Evidence Integration for Literature-based Health Assessments – February 2013 [Draft OHAT Approach; Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) 2013] for public comment; the deadline for receipt of comments is 11 June 2013. The Draft OHAT Approach adopts or adapts guidance from authoritative systematic review groups (AHRQ 2012; Guyatt et al. 2011; Higgins and Green 2011) to handle the breadth of data from human, animal, in vitro, and mechanistic studies relevant for addressing environmental health questions. In developing a draft approach, OHAT sought advice on systematic review through educational webinars and consultation with technical experts, the NTP Executive Committee, a working group of the NTP Board of Scientific Counselors, the NTP Board of Scientific Counselors, and the public. The draft approach involves a seven-step framework for incorporating systematic review methodology into OHAT literature-based health assessments. In early April of 2013, OHAT will release protocols for two case studies to illustrate application of this framework in specific evaluations. We will test our approach in these case studies to help determine whether additional refinement or revision to the Draft OHAT Approach might be needed. To help the public understand the draft approach and protocols, the NTP will hold a web-based informational meeting on 23 April 2013 to provide an overview of the framework, describe the contents of the case-study protocols, and respond to questions (DHHS 2013). Our intent is to carefully consider all public comments received on the draft approach and to present the Draft OHAT Approach to the NTP Board of Scientific Counselors at its meeting on 25–26 June 2013, with discussion by the NTP of any plans to update the document on the basis of the public’s input. Moving forward, our goal is to increase efficiency and provide greater transparency to the rigorous and objective approach that has been the hallmark of OHAT literature-based health assessments.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          An evidence-based medicine methodology to bridge the gap between clinical and environmental health sciences.

          Physicians and other clinicians could help educate patients about hazardous environmental exposures, especially to substances that could affect their reproductive health. But the relevant scientific evidence is voluminous, of variable quality, and largely unfamiliar to health professionals caring for people of childbearing age. To bridge this gap between clinical and environmental health, we created a methodology to help evaluate the quality of evidence and to support evidence-based decision making by clinicians and patients. The methodology can also support professional societies, health care organizations, government agencies, and others in developing prevention-oriented guidelines for use in clinical and policy settings.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            The Office of Health Assessment and Translation: A Problem-Solving Resource for the National Toxicology Program

            The National Toxicology Program (NTP) Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction (CERHR) was established in 1998. CERHR served as an environmental health resource providing in-depth scientific assessments of effects on reproduction and development caused by agents to which humans are exposed. To our knowledge, CERHR was the only resource of its kind, producing evaluations that considered toxicity findings in the context of current human exposures to derive “level-of-concern” conclusions. This qualitative integration step is what distinguished CERHR documents from more traditional hazard evaluations prepared by other agencies. When CERHR was established, the focus on reproduction and development was appropriate because of a strong interest in these health outcomes by the public, regulatory and health agencies, and the scientific community. In addition, a rationale for creating CERHR was the sense of a lack of uniformity across state and federal agencies in interpreting experimental animal studies of reproduction and development. CERHR was envisioned as a mechanism to apply a consistent strategy for interpreting these data. Although this need remains, we believe that the approaches used for CERHR evaluations should also be extended to other important health outcomes. Many chemicals display more than one type of toxicity, that is, carcinogens are often immunotoxicants, and reproductive and developmental toxicants may influence many endocrine-sensitive systems. A strict focus on reproductive and developmental end points evaluated in the context of current human exposures may not result in the most health protective levels of concern, and could be confusing to the public. From a public health perspective, understanding the implications of current human exposures should include consideration of all relevant health effects. Also, the NTP and the broader toxicology community need to confront the challenging scientific questions involved in utilizing information from the Toxicology in the 21st Century initiative (Collins et al. 2008). To do this we need a mechanism to systematically explore linkages between “toxicity pathways” and disease outcomes. To provide this, CERHR has spent the last 2 years in transition, laying the groundwork to become a more flexible scientific analysis program, while continuing to be grounded and recognized as a unique and important public health resource for the interpretation of reproductive and developmental hazards to humans. This evolution of CERHR is a response to the changing and increasing demands on both the NTP analysis and research programs. ”What does it mean?” is a question we increasingly want to answer, as our research and testing tools become more sophisticated and mechanistically based. A change in CERHR’s scope will also bring its work more in line with two recent initiatives established within the NTP that have mandates to address a broad range of health effects (Bucher 2008). In 2007 the NTP established a biomolecular screening program to administer its High Throughput Screening (HTS) Initiative in collaboration with our Tox21 partners (Schmidt 2009). This program takes advantage of technological advances in molecular biology and computer science to screen for mechanistic targets or “toxicity pathways” considered critical to adverse health effects. The host susceptibility program was also established in 2007 to study the genetic basis for differences in susceptibility that may lead to a better understanding of how substances in our environment may be hazardous to some individuals and not to others. On 11–13 January 2011, CERHR launched its expanded role by convening a diverse group of experts in toxicology, epidemiology, bioinformatics, and endocrinology to assess the strength of the literature linking selected environmental agents and exposures with diabetes and obesity (NTP 2011). Consideration was given to an array of information ranging from epidemiological findings and experimental animal and mechanistic data to screens of toxicity and disease pathways using HTS and literature curation methodologies. The use of several new analysis tools revealed novel linkages between a number of environmental agents and obesity or diabetes. These exciting findings are now being collated for publication. To fulfill its mission, the NTP is developing more innovative and flexible approaches for information and data integration, both across different programs within the NTP and across the different types of data that are generated and utilized (i.e., mechanistic or high throughput; “hypothesis-driven” animal studies of the type undertaken by National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)-funded extramural grantees; and toxicology studies conducted for the purpose of safety assessment). Recent experience with bisphenol A highlights the public’s confusion and the waste of scientific resources that can occur when these different types of scientific literature are developed on parallel, but separate, paths (Bucher 2009). The evolution of CERHR is an important part of this information integration effort, and CERHR’s new role calls for a new name: the Office of Health Assessment and Translation. Under the leadership of Kristina Thayer, the Office of Health Assessment and Translation will be the NTP focal point for the thoughtful and deliberative integration of relevant information of all types in health assessments for the protection of public health.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011).

              (2011)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Environ Health Perspect
                Environ. Health Perspect
                EHP
                Environmental Health Perspectives
                National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
                0091-6765
                1552-9924
                01 April 2013
                April 2013
                : 121
                : 4
                : a108-a109
                Affiliations
                [1]National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, E-mail: bucher@niehs.nih.gov
                Article
                ehp.1306711
                10.1289/ehp.1306711
                3620750
                23548834
                69a98ffb-08d3-48e0-842b-522ed5e09b94
                Copyright @ 2013

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, properly cited.

                History
                Categories
                Correspondence

                Public health
                Public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article