ReviewEnvironment & health (Washington, D.C.)2025
A Review of the Evidence of the Toxicity of Chemical Substances Included in the European Union Ambient Air Quality and Drinking Water Directives: Perspectives for Health Impact Assessments.
Review in Environment & health (Washington, D.C.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- NAMs for closing knowledge gaps in assessment of respiratory uptake - a PARC project.Frontiers in toxicology · 2026Article
- Expert perspectives on exposure-response functions for urban health policy: Lessons from a UBDPolicy workshop.Environmental research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The European Union (EU) Ambient Air Quality Directive (AAQD) and Drinking Water Directive (DWD) are aimed at maintaining and improving air quality and ensuring high standards for potable water across the EU. Besides several other indicators, the AAQD and DWD consist of chemical parameters (substances or substance groups) that are regulated within this framework. All the substances are associated with various health outcomes, and many of them are classified as carcinogenic or probably/possibly carcinogenic with causal links. To quantify the health burden of the chemical substances included in the AAQD and DWD, we need information regarding population exposure, current baseline mortality/morbidity rates in the populations, and exposure-response functions (ERFs) or unit risks (URs) from previous epidemiological studies. During this study, we analyzed the availability of ERFs or URs and discussed their applicability in health impact assessments (HIAs). From the HIA perspective, ERFsin terms of relative risk (RR), standardized mortality ratio (SMR), odds ratio (OR), or UR datawere available for many of the analyzed substances. However, for some substances such as acrylamide, antimony, boron, chlorate and chlorite, copper, microcystin-LR, and selenium, no risk measures could be identified. The aim of this study is to derive ERFs, which will allow HIAs for a larger number of chemicals when exposure data and baseline mortality/morbidity data are available. Currently, HIAs have largely focused only on main ambient pollutants such as particulate matter (PM
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.