IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v23y2003i1p163-174.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perspectives on Incorporating Human Neurobehavioral End Points in Risk Assessments

Author

Listed:
  • David C. Bellinger

Abstract

Three topics are addressed: (1) measurement issues (e.g., the reliability and validity of neurobehavioral test scores), (2) general principles of assessment, including test selection, and (3) interpretation of scores. Psychological tests generally perform as well as medical tests in terms of reliability and validity. Test manuals, assessment textbooks, and psychologists are useful resources to the risk assessor. The variety of different tests employed in neurobehavioral studies complicates interstudy comparisons. In addition, tests that ostensibly assess the same general domain of function might assess somewhat different abilities within that domain. Although a uniform battery for use in all studies seems desirable, the battery appropriate for a specific study depends on study goals, knowledge about the mechanism(s) of neurotoxicity, nature of the study population, and pattern of exposure. Exposure‐related neurobehavioral deficits are generally indicators of “altered function” rather than of “clinical disease.” Limiting concern to end points corresponding to clinical disease might not be appropriate. Many neurobehavioral diagnoses are phenomenological and a neurotoxicant might cause a unique pattern of deficits for which no label has been created. The concern that a small shift in the central tendency of a distribution of test scores has no significance for the individual should be reexamined in light of the prevention paradox, formulated on the basis of epidemiologic studies of chronic disease. Poor performance on a neurobehavioral test does not necessarily map clearly onto underlying behavioral or neural substrate. The absence of such linkages, given current knowledge about brain‐behavior relationships, should not reduce confidence in neurobehavioral end points. Use of neurobehavioral test scores involves considerations that differ little from those that the risk assessor routinely addresses in using end points commonly used in research on other topics in environmental epidemiology.

Suggested Citation

  • David C. Bellinger, 2003. "Perspectives on Incorporating Human Neurobehavioral End Points in Risk Assessments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(1), pages 163-174, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:23:y:2003:i:1:p:163-174
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1477-4658.1995.tb00318.x-i1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-4658.1995.tb00318.x-i1
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1477-4658.1995.tb00318.x-i1?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rockhill, B., 2001. "The privatization of risk," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 91(3), pages 365-368.
    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. K.S. Khroutski, 2002. "Epistemology of Civilised Man Diseases," E-LOGOS, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2002(1).
    2. Karatekin, Canan & Mason, Susan M. & Riegelman, Amy & Bakker, Caitlin & Hunt, Shanda & Gresham, Bria & Corcoran, Frederique & Barnes, Andrew, 2022. "Adverse childhood experiences: A scoping review of measures and methods," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    3. Zhang, J. & Tong, L. & Lamberson, P.J. & Durazo-Arvizu, R.A. & Luke, A. & Shoham, D.A., 2015. "Leveraging social influence to address overweight and obesity using agent-based models: The role of adolescent social networks," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 203-213.
    4. Sobo, Elisa J., 2005. "Parents' perceptions of pediatric day surgery risks: unforeseeable complications, or avoidable mistakes?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(10), pages 2341-2350, May.
    5. David C. Bellinger, 2002. "Perspectives on Incorporating Human Neurobehavioral End Points in Risk Assessments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 487-498, June.
    6. Christine Holmberg & Erika A. Waters & Katie Whitehouse & Mary Daly & Worta McCaskill-Stevens, 2015. "My Lived Experiences Are More Important Than Your Probabilities," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(8), pages 1010-1022, November.

    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:23:y:2003:i:1:p:163-174. 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: 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.