IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v19y1999i6p1077-1090.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantifying Uncertainty in a Risk Assessment Using Human Data

Author

Listed:
  • William E. Fayerweather
  • James J. Collins
  • A. Robert Schnatter
  • F. Terry Hearne
  • Reo A. Menning
  • Daniel P. Reynefr

Abstract

A call for risk assessment approaches that better characterize and quantify uncertainty has been made by the scientific and regulatory community. This paper responds to that call by demonstrating a distributional approachthat draws upon human data to derive potency estimates and to identify and quantify important sources of uncertainty. The approach is rooted in the science of decision analysis and employs an influence diagram, a decision tree, probabilistic weights, and a distribution of point estimates of carcinogenic potency. Its results estimate the likelihood of different carcinogenicrisks (potencies) for a chemical under a specific scenario. For this exercise, human data on formaldehyde were employed to demonstrate the approach. Sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the relative impact of specific levels and alternatives on the potency distribution. The resulting potency estimates are compared with the results of an exercise using animal data on formaldehyde. The paper demonstrates that distributional risk assessment is readily adapted to situations in which epidemiologic data serve as the basis for potency estimates. Strengths and weaknesses of the distributional approach are discussed. Areas for further application and research are recommended.

Suggested Citation

  • William E. Fayerweather & James J. Collins & A. Robert Schnatter & F. Terry Hearne & Reo A. Menning & Daniel P. Reynefr, 1999. "Quantifying Uncertainty in a Risk Assessment Using Human Data," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(6), pages 1077-1090, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:19:y:1999:i:6:p:1077-1090
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1999.tb01129.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1999.tb01129.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1999.tb01129.x?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mitchell J. Small, 2008. "Methods for Assessing Uncertainty in Fundamental Assumptions and Associated Models for Cancer Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1289-1308, October.
    2. Damian Morgan & Joan Ozanne-Smith, 2019. "A configural model of expert judgement as a preliminary epidemiological study of injury problems: An application to drowning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-17, October.
    3. Guido Sassi & Bernardo Ruggeri, 2008. "Uncertainty Evaluation of Human Risk Analysis (HRA) of Chemicals by Multiple Exposure Routes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1343-1356, October.
    4. Adam J. Hatfield & Keith W. Hipel, 2002. "Risk and Systems Theory," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(6), pages 1043-1057, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:riskan:v:19:y:1999:i:6:p:1077-1090. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.