• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文会议>Joint annual meeting of the International Society of Exposure Science and the International Society for Environmental Epidemiology >Challenges in the Application of Systematic Review Methods for Environmental Hazard Identification: Lessons Learned and Future Considerations
【24h】

Challenges in the Application of Systematic Review Methods for Environmental Hazard Identification: Lessons Learned and Future Considerations

机译：系统审查方法在环境危害识别中的应用挑战：经验教训和未来考虑

获取原文
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Systematic review methods aim to increase transparency, rigor, and reproducibility of literature-based evaluations, for the purposes of reaching a weight-of-evidence conclusion. These methods are becoming a gold-standard for reaching hazard conclusions for environmental exposures. They also have broad policy implications, and are being used by governmental bodies in public health decision-making. However, many of these methods were created with the evaluation of clinical studies in mind. Key differences exist when applying systematic review methods intended for evaluating the effectiveness of a clinical intervention to environmental studies. Unlike clinical trials, environmental and occupational exposure studies have greater variability in their study designs, populations and exposures. Steps in the systematic review process - literature searching, publication selection, and study quality evaluations- are more complex, labor-intensive, and prone to human error. Significant manpower and scientific expertise is needed to produce a quality evaluation. We describe the application of systematic review process for evaluating observational studies in environmental health. For example, the U.S. Report on Carcinogens has applied these methods to six cancer hazard assessments (e.g., trichloroethylene, light at night/shift work). New and existing systematic review tools have been developed specifically for environmental health to aid in the process. An overview of tools for literature searching, systematic data extraction, risk of bias (i.e., study quality) and sensitivity evaluations, and meta-analyses will be discussed. We also offer considerations for the utility of these tools including the development of novel automation techniques in relation to the purpose and quality of a review. Lastly, we propose future steps to improve methods and utilize new techniques to improve causal inference.
机译：系统评价方法旨在提高基于文献的评估的透明度，严谨性和可重复性，以得出证据的结论。这些方法已成为达到环境暴露危险结论的金标准。它们还具有广泛的政策含义，并且被政府机构用于公共卫生决策中。但是，许多方法都是在考虑临床研究评估的基础上创建的。在将旨在评估临床干预效果的系统评价方法用于环境研究时，存在主要差异。与临床试验不同，环境和职业暴露研究的研究设计，人群和暴露差异更大。系统评价过程中的步骤-文献检索，出版物选择和研究质量评估-更复杂，劳动强度大并且容易发生人为错误。需要大量的人力和科学专业知识来进行质量评估。我们描述了系统评价过程在评估环境健康观察研究中的应用。例如，《美国致癌物报告》已将这些方法应用于六项癌症危害评估（例如，三氯乙烯，夜间/轮班工作中的照明）。已专门针对环境健康开发了新的和现有的系统审查工具，以在此过程中提供帮助。将对用于文献检索，系统数据提取，偏倚风险（即研究质量）和敏感性评估以及荟萃分析的工具进行概述。我们还考虑了这些工具的实用性，包括与审查的目的和质量相关的新型自动化技术的开发。最后，我们提出了未来的步骤，以改进方法并利用新技术来改善因果关系。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号