The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Implementation of systematic reviews in EFSA scientific outputs workflow

Implementation of systematic reviews in EFSA scientific outputs workflow
Implementation of systematic reviews in EFSA scientific outputs workflow
Systematic reviews (SR) are an evidence synthesis approach that provides robust and transparent answers to clearly formulated questions. Originally developed for use in clinical practice, SRs have wider applicability, including food and feed safety risk assessment. EFSA has implemented the use of SRs, and this document contributes to the further development of this in-house capacity. Since the publication of the document “Application of Systematic Review Methodology to Food and Feed Safety Assessments to Support Decision Making”, which mainly focuses on interventions and exposures (PECO/PICO), little has changed in this arena. Fast increasing fields of application include chemical and environmental risk assessment, and analysing environmental management interventions. Considering time constraints at EFSA, the use of SRs should be pursued thoughtfully. Important are the use of explicit systematic methods aimed at minimising bias and maximising transparency in order to produce the most reliable findings that can be used to inform decision making. Participants of the training courses indicated SRs should be a priority for controversial topics (which might be subject to greater scrutiny by external parties, including the public, and thereby would benefit from maximum transparency) or topics for which there was disagreement amongst experts. Some areas addressed by EFSA have considerable potential impact, for example related to public health or animal trade, and these topics could be prioritised for SR. Under severe time constraints, a full SR may not be possible, but a rapid review can be considered. However rapid reviews are not a substitute for systematic reviews. Adoption of rapid reviews exchanges one set of concerns (time and resources contracts) for another (lack of robustness and comprehensiveness). In the view of the Consortium, the continuation of training opportunities is important. Appropriate commissioning of SR expertise is an important step in establishing the role of the methodology in EFSA risk assessments.

2012:EN-367
European Food Safety Authority
O'Connor, A.M.
9b5cec9f-857a-4cbb-8f94-923fdc538675
Lovei, G.L.
9ad3f697-2e6c-466d-a092-9e86d0f2f87c
Eales, J.
15f8e0cf-7730-430c-9b02-797c57200ef0
Frampton, Geoff
26c6163c-3428-45b8-b8b9-92091ff6c69f
Glanville, J.
8f03bd66-069e-4e68-b4eb-b7549edce062
Pullin, A.S.
bad5219c-e419-41b2-8722-81bd98907668
Sargeant, J.
d03059cf-4713-47a6-82fc-419dcc0f6e61
O'Connor, A.M.
9b5cec9f-857a-4cbb-8f94-923fdc538675
Lovei, G.L.
9ad3f697-2e6c-466d-a092-9e86d0f2f87c
Eales, J.
15f8e0cf-7730-430c-9b02-797c57200ef0
Frampton, Geoff
26c6163c-3428-45b8-b8b9-92091ff6c69f
Glanville, J.
8f03bd66-069e-4e68-b4eb-b7549edce062
Pullin, A.S.
bad5219c-e419-41b2-8722-81bd98907668
Sargeant, J.
d03059cf-4713-47a6-82fc-419dcc0f6e61

O'Connor, A.M., Lovei, G.L., Eales, J., Frampton, Geoff, Glanville, J., Pullin, A.S. and Sargeant, J. (2012) Implementation of systematic reviews in EFSA scientific outputs workflow (EFSA Supporting Publications, 2012:EN-367) European Food Safety Authority 36pp.

Record type: Monograph (Project Report)

Abstract

Systematic reviews (SR) are an evidence synthesis approach that provides robust and transparent answers to clearly formulated questions. Originally developed for use in clinical practice, SRs have wider applicability, including food and feed safety risk assessment. EFSA has implemented the use of SRs, and this document contributes to the further development of this in-house capacity. Since the publication of the document “Application of Systematic Review Methodology to Food and Feed Safety Assessments to Support Decision Making”, which mainly focuses on interventions and exposures (PECO/PICO), little has changed in this arena. Fast increasing fields of application include chemical and environmental risk assessment, and analysing environmental management interventions. Considering time constraints at EFSA, the use of SRs should be pursued thoughtfully. Important are the use of explicit systematic methods aimed at minimising bias and maximising transparency in order to produce the most reliable findings that can be used to inform decision making. Participants of the training courses indicated SRs should be a priority for controversial topics (which might be subject to greater scrutiny by external parties, including the public, and thereby would benefit from maximum transparency) or topics for which there was disagreement amongst experts. Some areas addressed by EFSA have considerable potential impact, for example related to public health or animal trade, and these topics could be prioritised for SR. Under severe time constraints, a full SR may not be possible, but a rapid review can be considered. However rapid reviews are not a substitute for systematic reviews. Adoption of rapid reviews exchanges one set of concerns (time and resources contracts) for another (lack of robustness and comprehensiveness). In the view of the Consortium, the continuation of training opportunities is important. Appropriate commissioning of SR expertise is an important step in establishing the role of the methodology in EFSA risk assessments.

Text
__soton.ac.uk_ude_personalfiles_users_gkf1_mydesktop_Implementation of systematic reviews in EFSA scientific outputs workflow.pdf - Other
Download (509kB)

More information

Published date: 17 December 2012
Additional Information: Question Number: EFSA-Q-2010-01018
Organisations: Faculty of Medicine

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 384847
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/384847
PURE UUID: ac70e507-64d6-45fb-adcb-e1d034fe023e
ORCID for Geoff Frampton: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-2005-0497

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 25 Jan 2016 16:24
Last modified: 18 Feb 2021 16:41

Export record

Contributors

Author: A.M. O'Connor
Author: G.L. Lovei
Author: J. Eales
Author: Geoff Frampton ORCID iD
Author: J. Glanville
Author: A.S. Pullin
Author: J. Sargeant

University divisions

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×