
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
pmid: 32653802
Background: There are several standards that offer explicit guidance on good practice in systematic reviews (SRs) for the medical sciences; however, no similarly comprehensive set of recommendations has been published for SRs that focus on human health risks posed by exposure to environmental challenges, chemical or otherwise. Objectives: To develop an expert, cross-sector consensus view on a key set of recommended practices for the planning and conduct of SRs in the environmental health sciences. Methods: A draft set of recommendations was derived from two existing standards for SRs in biomedicine and developed in a consensus process, which engaged international participation from government, industry, non-government organisations, and academia. The consensus process consisted of a workshop, follow-up webinars, email discussion and bilateral phone calls. Results: The Conduct of Systematic Reviews in Toxicology and Environmental Health Research (COSTER) recommendations cover 70 SR practices across eight performance domains. Detailed explanations for specific recommendations are made for those identified by the authors as either being novel to SR in general, specific to the environmental health SR context, or potentially controversial to environmental health SR stakeholders. Discussion: COSTER provides a set of recommendations that should facilitate the production of credible, high-value SRs of environmental health evidence, and advance discussion of a number of controversial aspects of conduct of EH SRs. Key recommendations include the management of conflicts of interest, handling of grey literature, and protocol registration and publication. A process for advancing from COSTER’s recommendations to developing a formal standard for EH SRs is also indicated.
570, Consensus, Epidemiology, 610, environmental health, Toxicology, research methods, systematic review, Health assessment, Humans, GE1-350, Research synthesis methods, Research standards, chemical risk assessment, Environmental sciences, Meta-analysis, Environmental health, research synthesis, Systematic review, epidemiology, research standards, Environmental Health, Radboudumc 10: Reconstructive and regenerative medicine RIHS: Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Systematic Reviews as Topic, toxicology
570, Consensus, Epidemiology, 610, environmental health, Toxicology, research methods, systematic review, Health assessment, Humans, GE1-350, Research synthesis methods, Research standards, chemical risk assessment, Environmental sciences, Meta-analysis, Environmental health, research synthesis, Systematic review, epidemiology, research standards, Environmental Health, Radboudumc 10: Reconstructive and regenerative medicine RIHS: Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Systematic Reviews as Topic, toxicology
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=opendoar____::358aee4cc897452c00244351e4d91f69&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=opendoar____::358aee4cc897452c00244351e4d91f69&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 75 | |
popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
views | 32 | |
downloads | 14 |