Review Articles

This step involves reviewing original journal article(s) that were the basis for the health guidelines, and studies published more recently than those used to derive the health guidelines.

Based on the Toxicological Profile, we know ATSDR did not find an appropriate study for the basis of a chronic MRL, but EPA found a sub-chronic study that it used to develop its chronic RfD. Looking at the data from the key studies table we just completed, we see that the RfD is based on Bruckner et al., 1986.

For this example, we can have confidence in this study because EPA found it appropriate to use to support the development of the RfD.

However, at your real sites, you might still have questions about the health guideline and want additional information not found in ATSDR’s Toxicological Profile or EPA’s IRIS. In that case, if you deem warranted, you could review the original journal article(s) that were the basis for the health guideline to gain more insight into the study. These journal articles are available to ATSDR staff and its partners through DocExpress.

Now, if warranted for real sites, you may need to identify studies published more recently than those used to develop the health guidelines. For example, you may have a high-profile contaminant or a profile that was released long ago. In these cases, you may want to check the Agency’s website for individual Toxicological Profiles. ATSDR may have released an addendum to the profile or a chemical-specific systematic evidence map that summarizes recent journal articles. You can also talk with the profile manager from ATSDR’s tox profile group.

Make sure to clearly identify any newer information you use in your report as being from a more recent publication. Because we have limited time here, we won’t do that for our example. While not required, you may wish to search for more recent articles.