• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Risk analysis >Commentary on 'Scientific Peer Review to Inform Regulatory Decision Making: Leadership Responsibilities and Cautions'
【24h】

Commentary on 'Scientific Peer Review to Inform Regulatory Decision Making: Leadership Responsibilities and Cautions'

机译：关于“科学同行评审，以指导监管决策：领导者的职责和注意事项”的评论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The practice of peer review has experienced major changes during the past two decades. Formerly the province of scientific professionals applying the standards for evaluating the quality of information in their respective disciplines, peer review has received increasing attention from policymakers, congressional committees, advocacy groups, and the media. The reason is quite simple—as risk assessment and other analytical tools have become more prominent as a basis for establishing regulations and standards, so has the policy and political scrutiny of these tools and the data they evaluate. The public health, environmental, and economic consequences of regulatory decision making are quite high in many instances, and peer review is being used to further ensure that the quality of the information relevant to such decision making meets accepted scientific standards.
机译：在过去的二十年中，同行评审的做法发生了重大变化。以前是科学专业人员，在其各自学科中应用评估信息质量的标准，同行评议受到了政策制定者，国会委员会，倡导团体和媒体的越来越多的关注。原因很简单-风险评估和其他分析工具作为建立法规和标准的基础变得更加突出，对这些工具及其评估数据的政策和政治审查也是如此。在许多情况下，监管决策的公共健康，环境和经济后果相当高，并且通过同行评审来进一步确保与此类决策相关的信息质量符合公认的科学标准。

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