Human Biomonitoring Data in Health Risk Assessments Published in Peer-Reviewed Journals between 2016 and 2021: Confronting Reality after a Preliminary Review

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Deepika Deepika¹  Marco Capodiferro²  Agneta A. Runkel³  Tine Bizjak³  Branko Kontić³  Öykü Dinçkol⁴  Vazha Dzhedzheia⁵  Dayna R. Schultz⁵  Ioannis Petridis⁵  Lorena Lopez-Suarez⁶ 

[1] Departament d’ Enginyeria Quimica, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Av. Països Catalans 26, 43007 Tarragona, Spain;Department of Environmental Chemistry, Institute of Environmental Assessment and Water Research (IDAEA), Spanish Council for Scientific Research (CSIC), Jordi Girona, 18, 08034 Barcelona, Spain;Department of Environmental Sciences, Jožef Stefan Institute, Jamova Cesta 39, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia;Department of Physiology and Pharmacology “Vittorio Erspamer”, Sapienza Università di Roma, Piazzale Aldo Moro 5, 00185 Rome, Italy;Environmental Engineering Laboratory, Department of Chemical Engineering, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 54124 Thessaloniki, Greece;Inserm UMR S-1124, Université de Paris, T3S, F-75006 Paris, France;

关键词: review;    human biomonitoring;    health risk assessment;    exposure assessment;   

DOI  :  10.3390/ijerph19063362

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

Human biomonitoring (HBM) is a rapidly developing field that is emphasized as an important approach for the assessment of health risks. However, its value for health risk assessment (HRA) remains to be clarified. We performed a review of publications concerned with applications of HBM in the assessment of health risks. The selection of publications for this review was limited by the search engines used (only PubMed and Scopus) and a timeframe of the last five years. The review focused on the clarity of 10 HRA elements, which influence the quality of HRA. We show that the usage of HBM data in HRA is limited and unclear. Primarily, the key HRA elements are not consistently applied or followed when using HBM in such assessments, and secondly, there are inconsistencies regarding the understanding of fundamental risk analysis principles and good practices in risk analysis. Our recommendations are as follows: (i) potential usage of HBM data in HRA should not be non-critically overestimated but rather limited and aligned to a specific value for exposure assessment or for the interpretation of health damage; (ii) improvements to HRA approaches, using HBM information or not, are needed and should strictly follow theoretical foundations of risk analysis.

【 授权许可】

Unknown