IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v464y2022ics0304380021003653.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A hierarchical Bayesian approach for incorporating expert opinions into parametric survival models: A case study of female Ixodes ricinus ticks exposed to various temperature and relative humidity conditions

Author

Listed:
  • Wongnak, Phrutsamon
  • Bord, Séverine
  • Donnet, Sophie
  • Hoch, Thierry
  • Beugnet, Frederic
  • Chalvet-Monfray, Karine

Abstract

The survival of ectothermic species is heavily dependent on environmental conditions, such as temperature and water balance. Understanding their survival responses to abiotic factors could help predict impacts of climate change on their population dynamics and human health. However, making a statistical inference and formulating a predictive model for mortality rates can be challenging when the observation numbers are limited. This study proposed an expert opinion elicitation framework that integrates expert opinions as prior distributions for the effects of continuous explanatory variables, through a Bayesian Parametric Survival Model (B-PSM). A historical survival dataset of female Ixodes ricinus ticks (Acari: Ixodidae) with small sample size was used. A total of 6 acarologists were recruited as experts for interactive online interview sessions to provide their opinions on average survival time under 4 different temperature and humidity scenarios. Most experts shared similar opinions on the effects of abiotic variables, and none of the experts was confident in the interaction effect. The variation of the opinions across multiple experts was handled by two approaches: 1) pooling and 2) averaging methods. The results showed that the pooling approach retains the variations of expert opinions, it may also disregard some irrelevant opinions to the observed data. While the averaging approach forms a numerical consensus across all the experts, but it may be less informative when the opinions distinctly diverge. The survival time of I. ricinus was found to be best described by the Weibull distribution, suggesting the mortality rate of ticks increases over time (aging effects). Also, the posterior predictions revealed that I. ricinus ticks were susceptible to desiccation conditions, with an interaction effect with the temperature. Therefore, our results suggested that relative humidity is an important factor in the survival of I. ricinus that should not be disregarded when evaluating the impacts of climate change on their population dynamics. Finally, this study provided a guideline for implementing the B-PSM framework to incorporate expert opinions and develop predictive survival models that can be applied in other ecological contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Wongnak, Phrutsamon & Bord, Séverine & Donnet, Sophie & Hoch, Thierry & Beugnet, Frederic & Chalvet-Monfray, Karine, 2022. "A hierarchical Bayesian approach for incorporating expert opinions into parametric survival models: A case study of female Ixodes ricinus ticks exposed to various temperature and relative humidity con," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 464(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:464:y:2022:i:c:s0304380021003653
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2021.109821
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380021003653
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2021.109821?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Quigley & Abigail Colson & Willy Aspinall & Roger M. Cooke, 2018. "Elicitation in the Classical Model," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Luis C. Dias & Alec Morton & John Quigley (ed.), Elicitation, chapter 0, pages 15-36, Springer.
    2. Johnson, Fred A. & Smith, Brian J. & Bonneau, Mathieu & Martin, Julien & Romagosa, Christina & Mazzotti, Frank & Waddle, Hardin & Reed, Robert N. & Eckles, Jennifer Kettevrlin & Vitt, Laurie J., 2017. "Expert Elicitation, Uncertainty, and the Value of Information in Controlling Invasive Species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 83-90.
    3. Tereza Cristina Giannini & Wilian França Costa & Guaraci Duran Cordeiro & Vera Lucia Imperatriz-Fonseca & Antonio Mauro Saraiva & Jacobus Biesmeijer & Lucas Alejandro Garibaldi, 2017. "Projected climate change threatens pollinators and crop production in Brazil," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-13, August.
    4. Abigail R Colson & Roger M Cooke, 2018. "Expert Elicitation: Using the Classical Model to Validate Experts’ Judgments," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 113-132.
    5. Compare, M. & Baraldi, P. & Bani, I. & Zio, E. & Mc Donnell, D., 2017. "Development of a Bayesian multi-state degradation model for up-to-date reliability estimations of working industrial components," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 25-40.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schoch-Spana, Monica & Ravi, Sanjana J. & Martin, Elena K., 2022. "Modeling epidemic recovery: An expert elicitation on issues and approaches," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    2. Jeremy Rohmer & Eric Chojnacki, 2021. "Forecast of environment systems using expert judgements: performance comparison between the possibilistic and the classical model," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 131-146, March.
    3. Elena Verdolini & Laura Díaz Anadón & Erin Baker & Valentina Bosetti & Lara Aleluia Reis, 2018. "Future Prospects for Energy Technologies: Insights from Expert Elicitations," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 133-153.
    4. Misuri, Alessio & Landucci, Gabriele & Cozzani, Valerio, 2020. "Assessment of safety barrier performance in Natech scenarios," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    5. Milford, James & Henrion, Max & Hunter, Chad & Newes, Emily & Hughes, Caroline & Baldwin, Samuel F., 2022. "Energy sector portfolio analysis with uncertainty," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 306(PA).
    6. Peter Harrison Howard & Derek Sylvan, 2020. "Wisdom of the experts: Using survey responses to address positive and normative uncertainties in climate-economic models," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(2), pages 213-232, September.
    7. Hathout, Michel & Vuillet, Marc & Carvajal, Claudio & Peyras, Laurent & Diab, Youssef, 2019. "Expert judgments calibration and combination for assessment of river levee failure probability," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 377-392.
    8. Katarina Buganova & Maria Luskova & Jozef Kubas & Michal Brutovsky & Jaroslav Slepecky, 2021. "Sustainability of Business through Project Risk Identification with Use of Expert Estimates," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-17, June.
    9. Carless, Travis S. & Redus, Kenneth & Dryden, Rachel, 2021. "Estimating nuclear proliferation and security risks in emerging markets using Bayesian Belief Networks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    10. Albara M. Mustafa & Abbas Barabadi & Tore Markeset & Masoud Naseri, 2021. "An overall performance index for wind farms: a case study in Norway Arctic region," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 12(5), pages 938-950, October.
    11. Cooke, Roger M. & Marti, Deniz & Mazzuchi, Thomas, 2021. "Expert forecasting with and without uncertainty quantification and weighting: What do the data say?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 378-387.
    12. Claire Copeland & Britta Turner & Gareth Powells & Kevin Wilson, 2022. "In Search of Complementarity: Insights from an Exercise in Quantifying Qualitative Energy Futures," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-21, July.
    13. Debora Sotto & Arlindo Philippi & Tan Yigitcanlar & Md Kamruzzaman, 2019. "Aligning Urban Policy with Climate Action in the Global South: Are Brazilian Cities Considering Climate Emergency in Local Planning Practice?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-31, September.
    14. Bezerra, Antonio Diego M. & Pacheco Filho, Alípio J.S. & Bomfim, Isac G.A. & Smagghe, Guy & Freitas, Breno M., 2019. "Agricultural area losses and pollinator mismatch due to climate changes endanger passion fruit production in the Neotropics," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 49-57.
    15. Pinciroli, Luca & Baraldi, Piero & Zio, Enrico, 2023. "Maintenance optimization in industry 4.0," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    16. Cameron J. Williams & Kevin J. Wilson & Nina Wilson, 2021. "A comparison of prior elicitation aggregation using the classical method and SHELF," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(3), pages 920-940, July.
    17. Blancke, Olivier & Tahan, Antoine & Komljenovic, Dragan & Amyot, Normand & Lévesque, Mélanie & Hudon, Claude, 2018. "A holistic multi-failure mode prognosis approach for complex equipment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 136-151.
    18. Luhede, Amelie & Yaqine, Houda & Bahmanbijari, Reza & Römer, Michael & Upmann, Thorsten, 2024. "The value of information in water quality monitoring and management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    19. Gayan Dharmarathne & Gabriela F. Nane & Andrew Robinson & Anca M. Hanea, 2023. "Shrinking the Variance in Experts’ “Classical” Weights Used in Expert Judgment Aggregation," Forecasting, MDPI, vol. 5(3), pages 1-14, August.
    20. Adedipe, Tosin & Shafiee, Mahmood & Zio, Enrico, 2020. "Bayesian Network Modelling for the Wind Energy Industry: An Overview," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:464:y:2022:i:c:s0304380021003653. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.