Setting off on the right path: make your research regulatory relevant

Scientifically well-established methods do not automatically get used in regulations. Even when there is an urgent need for regulatory relevant test methods, methods need to pass through a so-called standardization process. This involves following specific agreed processes, which define the timeline and requirements (e.g., validation, documentation, approval) before the method can be integrated in regulatory oriented standards or Test Guidelines from the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The process is often seen as too complex or too resource (and time) consuming by the scientific community, which inhibits method developers from translating their scientific methods and protocols into standards or OECD Test Guidelines. Numerous incentives exist for scientists to be (more) active in the standardization process and allow regulation to keep up with new scientific developments. These include an increase in research impacts, an expansion and diversification of the international expert network, and an access to more fundings. This paper shows scientists how to reach such outcomes, by providing guidance on how to navigate successfully through the standards and OECD Test Guidelines development processes. Especially the requirements for method validation, which is a prerequisite in this process and common across the different standardization bodies. For further details and insights, readers are invited to consult the various freely available resources generated by the NanoHarmony EU project. These are compiled in the OECD Test Guideline Process Mentor (https://testguideline-development.org/). The active participation of scientists along the entire process toward standards and OECD Test Guidelines is key. Only then can their methods be expanded into a wider, regulatory application toward a safer world.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics
Published
2025-06-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2025.1561964
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Health and Medical Research Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.88

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Setting off on the right path: make your research regulatory relevant

Rachel Smith, Eric A.J. Bleeker, Thomas A. J. Kuhlbusch, Claus Svendsen et al.
1 citations
Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics
Health and Medical Research Impacts
1.88
article

Setting off on the right path: make your research regulatory relevant

Rachel Smith, Eric A.J. Bleeker, Thomas A. J. Kuhlbusch, Claus Svendsen, Sean M. Kelly, Elisabeth Heunisch, Eneas N. Morel, Anna Pohl
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Scientifically well-established methods do not automatically get used in regulations. Even when there is an urgent need for regulatory relevant test methods, methods need to pass through a so-called standardization process. This involves following specific agreed processes, which define the timeline and requirements (e.g., validation, documentation, approval) before the method can be integrated in regulatory oriented standards or Test Guidelines from the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The process is often seen as too complex or too resource (and time) consuming by the scientific community, which inhibits method developers from translating their scientific methods and protocols into standards or OECD Test Guidelines. Numerous incentives exist for scientists to be (more) active in the standardization process and allow regulation to keep up with new scientific developments. These include an increase in research impacts, an expansion and diversification of the international expert network, and an access to more fundings. This paper shows scientists how to reach such outcomes, by providing guidance on how to navigate successfully through the standards and OECD Test Guidelines development processes. Especially the requirements for method validation, which is a prerequisite in this process and common across the different standardization bodies. For further details and insights, readers are invited to consult the various freely available resources generated by the NanoHarmony EU project. These are compiled in the OECD Test Guideline Process Mentor (https://testguideline-development.org/). The active participation of scientists along the entire process toward standards and OECD Test Guidelines is key. Only then can their methods be expanded into a wider, regulatory application toward a safer world.

Frontiers in Research Metrics and AnalyticsVol. 10
UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (GB), National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (NL), Association des Operateurs Postaux Publics Europeens (BE), UK Health Security Agency (GB), University of Duisburg-Essen (DE), Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (DE)
Bundesanstalt für Arbeitsschutz und Arbeitsmedizin
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Health and Medical Research Impacts
1.88
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.