ReviewEnvironmental science & technology2026
Review on Predictive Models and Integration Strategies for Holistic Impact Assessment of Chemicals and Materials.
Review in Environmental science & technology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- New approach methodologies for next-generation risk assessment of nanomaterials and nano-enabled products.Nano convergence · 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
47 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rapid innovation in chemicals and materials calls for innovative integrated approaches that can assess their impacts across different areas. The Safe and Sustainable-by-Design (SSbD) framework, developed by the European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC), offers a comprehensive approach with which to evaluate the safety and sustainability of chemicals and materials across their lifecycle. While SSbD uses various modeling approaches to assess impacts on human health, the environment, and socioeconomic factors, these are often applied independently, hindering a holistic understanding of the complex interactions between these factors and thus the simultaneous optimization of function, cost, safety and sustainability. This review describes existing predictive models and available strategies for their integration to facilitate more comprehensive and holistic chemical and material impact assessments. Specifically, we examine three model integration strategies: consensus integration that combines model predictions for the same impact categories, weighted aggregation that combines different scores in a unified one, and pipeline integration that links models sequentially to create a more unified assessment. Furthermore, we address key concepts related to the uncertainty of model predictions and the applicability domain of models, highlighting how these evolve in integrated frameworks. Insights into the applications of these integration strategies and challenges will allow a more accurate, coherent, and sustainable approach to chemical and material safety and sustainability assessments.
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.