The ability to conduct weight-of-evidence assessments to inform the assessment of potential environmental neurotoxicants is limited by lack of comparability of study methods, data analysis, and reporting. There is a need to establish consensus guidelines for conducting, analyzing, and reporting neurodevelopmental environmental epidemiologic studies, while recognizing that consistency is likewise needed for epidemiology studies examining other health outcomes. This paper proposes a set of considerations to be used by the scientific community at-large as a tool for systematically evaluating the quality of proposed and/or published studies in terms of their value for weight-of-evidence assessments. Particular emphasis is placed on evaluating the sensitivity and specificity of neurodevelopmental function tests, as these characteristics directly affect the risk of false positive and false negative decisions at the level of the individual, thus influencing the risk of incorrect conclusions at the level of study findings. The proposed considerations are the first step in what must be a larger consensus-based process and can serve to catalyze such a discussion. Achieving consensus in these types of endeavors is difficult; however, opportunities exist for further interdisciplinary discussion, collaboration, and research that will help realize this goal. Broad acceptance and application of such an approach can facilitate the expanded use of environmental epidemiology studies of potential neurodevelopmental toxicants in the protection of public health, and specifically children's health.