The JRC Statistical Audit of the 2018 European Skills Index (ESI)

Increased connectivity between nations, technological development, changes in work organisation and demographic trends have profound effects on the future of work and workplaces. Policies focusing on skills development and human capital are essential to turn these structural changes into an opportunity for all, by increasing productivity levels and quality of life in the EU. The Commission services have developed an EU tailor-made monitoring framework – the European Skills Index (ESI) – that measures the performance of a country’s skills system taking into account its multiple facets from continually developing the skills of the population to activating and effectively matching these skills to the needs of employers in the labour market. The European Skills Index builds on three pillars: skills development, skills activation and skills matching. These pillars are used to organise and aggregate 15 individual indicators into a single summary measure. This framework inevitably entails both conceptual and practical challenges. The statistical audit discussed in this note was conducted by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre, and it aims at maximising the reliability and transparency of the European Skills Index (1). It should enable policy analysts and researchers alike to draw more relevant, meaningful and useful conclusions on the national skills systems in the EU. (1) The JRC statistical audit is based on the recommendations of the OECD & JRC (2008) Handbook on Composite Indicators, and on more recent research from the JRC. Generally, JRC audits of composite indicators and scoreboards are conducted upon request of their developers, see https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/coin and https://composite-indicators.jrc.ec.europa.eu/JRC.I.1-Modelling, Indicators and Impact Evaluatio

The JRC Statistical Audit of the Social Progress Index (SPI)

A spur of social progress is enabling people to fulfil their own potential and in doing so the capability of the society they are a part of. The Social Progress Index (SPI) is an international monitoring framework for measuring social progress without resorting to the use of economic indicators. It provides a basis to understand the relationship between economic and social progress and measures country performance on aspects of social and environmental performance. The Social Progress Index builds on three dimensions: Basic Human Needs, Foundations of Wellbeing and Opportunity. These dimensions establish the basis of the framework and are used to aggregate 51 social outcome indicators organized in 12 components into a single summary measure. The statistical audit discussed in this report was conducted by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre, and it aims at maximizing the reliability and transparency of the Social Progress Index. The audit focuses on the statistical coherence and the impact of key modelling assumptions used in the SPI framework. The statistical audit of the SPI should enable policy analysts and researchers alike to draw more relevant and well-targeted conclusions regarding inclusive growth strategies that benefit everyone at all levels of economic development.JRC.I.1-Modelling, Indicators and Impact Evaluatio

An investigation into the use of computational and in vitro methods for acute systemic toxicity prediction

We have assessed the abilities of five alternative (non-animal) approaches to predict acute oral toxicity, a toxicological endpoint relevant to multiple pieces of legislation on chemicals and consumer products. In particular, we have investigated four QSAR models (ToxSuite, TOPKAT, TEST and ADMET Predictor) and one in vitro method (3T3 NRU). Based on a test set of in vitro and in vivo data for 180 compounds, we have characterized the predictive performance of each method when used alone (both for LD50 prediction and acute toxicity classification into three categories), as well as multiple test combinations (batteries) and stepwise testing strategies (for acute toxicity classification into three categories). When used individually, the alternative methods showed an ability to predict LD50 with correlation coefficients in the range from 49% to 84%, and to classify into three toxicity groups with accuracies in the range from 41% to 72%. When the alternative methods were combined into batteries or testing strategies, the overall accuracy of prediction could reach 76%. We also illustrate how different combinations of methods can be used to optimize sensitivity or specificity.JRC.I.5-Systems Toxicolog

The regional gender equality monitor

Gender equality is one of the fundamental values of the European Union and the European Pillar of Social Rights establishes it as one of its key principles. While there are several measures of gender equality at country level there is none that capture regional differences in Europe. This new regional gender equality monitor consists of two composite indices that address two specific and complementary aspects of this multifaceted phenomenon. The first index assesses the female disadvantage by measuring regional differences when females are doing worse than males. The second index measures the female level of achievement compared to the best regional performance. The indices are called the Female Disadvantage Index (FemDI) and the Female Achievement Index (FemAI). Viewing together the two indices facilitates the understanding of where women are at disadvantage and where they are performing well across the different regions and between the Member States.JRC.I.1-Monitoring, Indicators & Impact Evaluatio

JRC Statistical Audit of the 2020 Gender Equality Index

The 2020 Gender Equality Index (GEI) ranks the 27 EU member states and the UK on 31 performance indicators measuring gender equalities in the six domains of work, money, knowledge, time, power, health and additionally the domain of violence, as well as intersecting inequalities. By providing relevant statistics, data and measures, all essential components for evidence-based policymaking and successful gender mainstreaming, it supports the assessment of policy outcomes on women and men. Since 2013 the Gender Equality Index is released biannually by the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) while from 2019 and on, the releases will be on annual basis. The European Commission’s Competence Centre on Composite Indicators and Scoreboards (COIN) at the Joint Research Centre (JRC) was invited by the European Institute for Gender Equality to audit the 2020 edition of the GEI. The statistical audit presented herein aims to contribute to ensuring the transparency of the GEI methodology and the reliability of the results. The report touches upon data quality issues, the conceptual and statistical coherence of the framework and the impact of modelling assumptions on the results. The analysis suggests that meaningful inferences can be drawn from the Gender Equality Index. It confirms that the 2020 GEI meets the quality standards for statistical soundness and acknowledges it as a reliable composite indicator to measure gender equality in the European Union.JRC.I.1-Monitoring, Indicators & Impact Evaluatio

Joint Research Centre Statistical Audit of the 2018 Global Attractiveness Index

Attractiveness is a prerequisite and a symptom for competitiveness and it is valued both because it implies a nation’s ability to attract talent, capital and assets (know-how, technologies, and other), and because more in general it stimulates the whole process of economic and social development. The European House - Ambrosetti has developed an international monitoring framework – the Global Attractiveness Index (GAI) – that measures a country’s attractiveness as determining element of its ability to be competitive and to grow. The GAI builds on four attributes of attractiveness: Openness, Innovation, Efficiency, and Endowment. These pillars are used to organise and aggregate 21 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) into a single summary measure for 144 countries that altogether cover approximately 93% of the world’s population and 99% of Gross Domestic Product (in US$) worldwide. This framework inevitably entails both conceptual and practical challenges. The statistical audit discussed in this note was conducted by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre, and it aims at maximising the reliability and transparency of the Global Attractiveness Index. It should enable policy analysts and researchers alike to draw more relevant, meaningful and useful conclusions on good practices and challenges that countries face in today’s competitive game to business and job creation.JRC.I.1-Modelling, Indicators and Impact Evaluatio

A tutorial for analysing the cost-effectiveness of alternative methods for assessing chemical toxicity: the case of acute oral toxicity prediction

Compared with traditional animal methods for toxicity testing, in vitro and in silico methods are widely considered to allow for more cost-effective assessment of chemicals. However, how to assess the cost-effectiveness of alternative methods has remained unclear. This paper offers a user-oriented tutorial to performing cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of alternative (non-animal) methods. The purpose is to demonstrate how CEA facilitates the identification of the alternative method, or the combination of methods, that offers the highest information gain per unit of cost. We illustrate how information gains and costs of single methods and method combinations can be assessed. Using acute oral toxicity as an example, we apply CEA to a set of four in silico methods (ToxSuite, TOPKAT, T.E.S.T, ADMET Predictor), one in vitro method (3T3 neutral red uptake cytotoxicity assay), and various combinations of these methods. Our results underline that in silico tools are more cost-effective than the in vitro test. Battery combinations of alternative methods, however, do not necessarily outperform single methods because information gains from a battery are easily outweighed by additional costs.JRC.I.5-Systems Toxicolog

AUTOMATION OF AN IN VITRO CITOTOXICITY ASSAY USED TO ESTIMATE STARTING DOSES IN ACUTE ORAL SYSTEMIC TOXICITY TESTS

The development, optimisation and validation of alternative methods that can be used for regulatory safety assessment is a challenging endeavour. Moreover, the demand for reliable and relevant tests that can be widely deployed has never been greater. New technologies offer significant opportunities for improving the performance of in vitro assays both in terms of the quality of the data produced and the value of the information derived. Automation of in vitro methods has had a major impact in the pharmaceutical sector where High Throughput Screening (HTS) of large molecular libraries has become common place. Traditionally however the HTS approaches employed have focused on therapeutic targets and only in recent years has attention shifted to include toxicological profiling, in an effort to reduce safety-related attrition rates. Application of assay automation and HTS to the regulatory safety assessment and prioritisation of nonpharmaceutical chemicals is still in its infancy but shows great promise in terms of facilitating better understanding of toxicological modes-of-action, reducing the reliance on animal testing, and allowing more data-poor chemicals to be assessed at a reasonable cost. To promote the uptake and acceptance of HTS approaches for supporting regulatory decision making, we describe in a stepwise manner how a well known cytotoxicity assay (uptake of neutral red by 3T3 fibroblasts) can be automated so that the essential features and reliability of the assay are retained while the throughput is increased. To demonstrate the performance of the automated assay, results generated with selected reference chemicals were directly compared with data generated during a previous international validation study, where the aim was to evaluate if the assay could be used to predict acute systemic toxicity in rodents. The automated assay was then included in a formal ECVAM validation study to further evaluate the relevance of the assay which involved the blind-testing of 56 reference chemicals on the HTS platform. Finally, the assay was adapted to a format more suited to higher throughput testing without compromising the quality of the concentration-response data obtained.JRC.I.5-Systems Toxicolog