231 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24481642)
1. Facilitating the use of non-standard in vivo studies in health risk assessment of chemicals: a proposal to improve evaluation criteria and reporting.
Beronius A; Molander L; Rudén C; Hanberg A
J Appl Toxicol; 2014 Jun; 34(6):607-17. PubMed ID: 24481642
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Toxicity assessment strategies, data requirements, and risk assessment approaches to derive health based guidance values for non-relevant metabolites of plant protection products.
Dekant W; Melching-Kollmuss S; Kalberlah F
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2010 Mar; 56(2):135-42. PubMed ID: 19883711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Testing and refining the Science in Risk Assessment and Policy (SciRAP) web-based platform for evaluating the reliability and relevance of in vivo toxicity studies.
Beronius A; Molander L; Zilliacus J; Rudén C; Hanberg A
J Appl Toxicol; 2018 Dec; 38(12):1460-1470. PubMed ID: 29806706
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Good Evaluation Practice: a proposal of guidelines.
Malmfors T; Di Marco P; Savolainen K
Toxicol Lett; 2004 Jun; 151(1):19-23. PubMed ID: 15177636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The OECD expert meeting on ecotoxicology and environmental fate--towards the development of improved OECD guidelines for the testing of nanomaterials.
Kühnel D; Nickel C
Sci Total Environ; 2014 Feb; 472():347-53. PubMed ID: 24461369
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)--explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force.
Husereau D; Drummond M; Petrou S; Carswell C; Moher D; Greenberg D; Augustovski F; Briggs AH; Mauskopf J; Loder E;
Value Health; 2013; 16(2):231-50. PubMed ID: 23538175
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Inhalation toxicity studies: OECD guidelines in relation to REACH and scientific developments.
Arts JH; Muijser H; Jonker D; van de Sandt JJ; Bos PM; Feron VJ
Exp Toxicol Pathol; 2008 Jun; 60(2-3):125-33. PubMed ID: 18455380
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Alternative methods to safety studies in experimental animals: role in the risk assessment of chemicals under the new European Chemicals Legislation (REACH).
Lilienblum W; Dekant W; Foth H; Gebel T; Hengstler JG; Kahl R; Kramer PJ; Schweinfurth H; Wollin KM
Arch Toxicol; 2008 Apr; 82(4):211-36. PubMed ID: 18322675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Risk assessment of endocrine active chemicals: identifying chemicals of regulatory concern.
Bars R; Fegert I; Gross M; Lewis D; Weltje L; Weyers A; Wheeler JR; Galay-Burgos M
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2012 Oct; 64(1):143-54. PubMed ID: 22735369
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Use of the dog as non-rodent test species in the safety testing schedule associated with the registration of crop and plant protection products (pesticides): present status.
Box RJ; Spielmann H
Arch Toxicol; 2005 Nov; 79(11):615-26. PubMed ID: 15940470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A modular one-generation reproduction study as a flexible testing system for regulatory safety assessment.
Vogel R; Seidle T; Spielmann H
Reprod Toxicol; 2010 Apr; 29(2):242-5. PubMed ID: 19808091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Relevance and reliability of experimental data in human health risk assessment of pesticides.
Kaltenhäuser J; Kneuer C; Marx-Stoelting P; Niemann L; Schubert J; Stein B; Solecki R
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2017 Aug; 88():227-237. PubMed ID: 28655655
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Safety and nutritional assessment of GM plants and derived food and feed: the role of animal feeding trials.
EFSA GMO Panel Working Group on Animal Feeding Trials
Food Chem Toxicol; 2008 Mar; 46 Suppl 1():S2-70. PubMed ID: 18328408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Reporting and evaluation criteria as means towards a transparent use of ecotoxicity data for environmental risk assessment of pharmaceuticals.
Ågerstrand M; Küster A; Bachmann J; Breitholtz M; Ebert I; Rechenberg B; Rudén C
Environ Pollut; 2011 Oct; 159(10):2487-92. PubMed ID: 21763042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Relevance of non-guideline studies for risk assessment: the coverage model based on most frequent targets in repeated dose toxicity studies.
Batke M; Aldenberg T; Escher S; Mangelsdorf I
Toxicol Lett; 2013 Apr; 218(3):293-8. PubMed ID: 22975263
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Bridging the gap between academic research and regulatory health risk assessment of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals.
Beronius A; Hanberg A; Zilliacus J; Rudén C
Curr Opin Pharmacol; 2014 Dec; 19():99-104. PubMed ID: 25238457
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.
Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
Eur J Health Econ; 2008 Nov; 9 Suppl 1():5-29. PubMed ID: 18987905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Risk assessment of 'endocrine substances': guidance on identifying endocrine disruptors.
Lewis RW
Toxicol Lett; 2013 Dec; 223(3):287-90. PubMed ID: 24036001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. An enhanced tiered toxicity testing framework with triggers for assessing hazards and risks of commodity chemicals.
Plunkett LM; Kaplan AM; Becker RA
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2010 Dec; 58(3):382-94. PubMed ID: 20709129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The OECD guidelines for the testing of chemicals and pesticides.
Buschmann J
Methods Mol Biol; 2013; 947():37-56. PubMed ID: 23138894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
