IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v25y2005i1p39-48.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Uncertainty Distribution Associated with Estimating a Proportion in Microbial Risk Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Nicolas Miconnet
  • Marie Cornu
  • Annie Beaufort
  • Laurent Rosso
  • Jean‐Baptiste Denis

Abstract

The uncertainty associated with estimates should be taken into account in quantitative risk assessment. Each input's uncertainty can be characterized through a probabilistic distribution for use under Monte Carlo simulations. In this study, the sampling uncertainty associated with estimating a low proportion on the basis of a small sample size was considered. A common application in microbial risk assessment is the estimation of a prevalence, proportion of contaminated food products, on the basis of few tested units. Three Bayesian approaches (based on beta(0, 0), beta , and beta(l, 1)) and one frequentist approach (based on the frequentist confidence distribution) were compared and evaluated on the basis of simulations. For small samples, we demonstrated some differences between the four tested methods. We concluded that the better method depends on the true proportion of contaminated products, which is by definition unknown in common practice. When no prior information is available, we recommend the beta prior or the confidence distribution. To illustrate the importance of these differences, the four methods were used in an applied example. We performed two‐dimensional Monte Carlo simulations to estimate the proportion of cold smoked salmon packs contaminated by Listeria monocytogenes, one dimension representing within‐factory uncertainty, modeled by each of the four studied methods, and the other dimension representing variability between companies.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicolas Miconnet & Marie Cornu & Annie Beaufort & Laurent Rosso & Jean‐Baptiste Denis, 2005. "Uncertainty Distribution Associated with Estimating a Proportion in Microbial Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(1), pages 39-48, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:25:y:2005:i:1:p:39-48
    DOI: 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2005.00565.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2005.00565.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2005.00565.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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tore Schweder & Nils Lid Hjort, 2002. "Confidence and Likelihood," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 29(2), pages 309-332, June.
    2. B. K. Hope & A. R. Baker & E. D. Edel & A. T. Hogue & W. D. Schlosser & R. Whiting & R. M. McDowell & R. A. Morales, 2002. "An Overview of the Salmonella Enteritidis Risk Assessment for Shell Eggs and Egg Products," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(2), pages 203-218, April.
    3. H. Christopher Frey & David E. Burmaster, 1999. "Methods for Characterizing Variability and Uncertainty: Comparison of Bootstrap Simulation and Likelihood‐Based Approaches," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 109-130, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Régis Pouillot & Nicolas Miconnet & Anne‐Laure Afchain & Marie Laure Delignette‐Muller & Annie Beaufort & Laurent Rosso & Jean‐Baptiste Denis & Marie Cornu, 2007. "Quantitative Risk Assessment of Listeria monocytogenes in French Cold‐Smoked Salmon: I. Quantitative Exposure Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 683-700, June.
    2. Amir Mokhtari & Jane M. Van Doren, 2019. "An Agent‐Based Model for Pathogen Persistence and Cross‐Contamination Dynamics in a Food Facility," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(5), pages 992-1021, May.
    3. V. J. Roelofs & M. C. Kennedy, 2011. "Sensitivity Analysis and Estimation of Extreme Tail Behavior in Two‐Dimensional Monte Carlo Simulation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(10), pages 1597-1609, October.
    4. Régis Pouillot & Véronique Goulet & Marie Laure Delignette‐Muller & Aurélie Mahé & Marie Cornu, 2009. "Quantitative Risk Assessment of Listeria monocytogenes in French Cold‐Smoked Salmon: II. Risk Characterization," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(6), pages 806-819, June.
    5. Amir Mokhtari & David Oryang & Yuhuan Chen & Regis Pouillot & Jane Van Doren, 2018. "A Mathematical Model for Pathogen Cross‐Contamination Dynamics during the Postharvest Processing of Leafy Greens," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(8), pages 1718-1737, August.

    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. David R. Bickel, 2024. "Bayesian and frequentist inference derived from the maximum entropy principle with applications to propagating uncertainty about statistical methods," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 65(8), pages 5389-5407, October.
    2. La Vecchia, Davide & Moor, Alban & Scaillet, Olivier, 2023. "A higher-order correct fast moving-average bootstrap for dependent data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 235(1), pages 65-81.
    3. McKenna, Claire & Chalabi, Zaid & Epstein, David & Claxton, Karl, 2010. "Budgetary policies and available actions: A generalisation of decision rules for allocation and research decisions," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 170-181, January.
    4. Xiaokang Luo & Tirthankar Dasgupta & Minge Xie & Regina Y. Liu, 2021. "Leveraging the Fisher randomization test using confidence distributions: Inference, combination and fusion learning," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 83(4), pages 777-797, September.
    5. Régis Pouillot & Nicolas Miconnet & Anne‐Laure Afchain & Marie Laure Delignette‐Muller & Annie Beaufort & Laurent Rosso & Jean‐Baptiste Denis & Marie Cornu, 2007. "Quantitative Risk Assessment of Listeria monocytogenes in French Cold‐Smoked Salmon: I. Quantitative Exposure Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 683-700, June.
    6. Piero Veronese & Eugenio Melilli, 2021. "Confidence Distribution for the Ability Parameter of the Rasch Model," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 86(1), pages 131-166, March.
    7. Kruschke, John K. & Liddell, Torrin, 2016. "The Bayesian New Statistics: Hypothesis testing, estimation, meta-analysis, and power analysis from a Bayesian perspective," OSF Preprints ksfyr, Center for Open Science.
    8. Xavier Romão & Esmeralda Paupério, 2016. "A framework to assess quality and uncertainty in disaster loss data," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 83(2), pages 1077-1102, September.
    9. Yang Liu & Jan Hannig, 2017. "Generalized Fiducial Inference for Logistic Graded Response Models," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 82(4), pages 1097-1125, December.
    10. Bickel David R., 2012. "Empirical Bayes Interval Estimates that are Conditionally Equal to Unadjusted Confidence Intervals or to Default Prior Credibility Intervals," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 11(3), pages 1-34, February.
    11. Michael Greenberg & Karen Lowrie, 2011. "Celebrating Three Decades of Public Policy‐Oriented Interdisciplinary Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(1), pages 7-11, January.
    12. Nancy Reid & David R. Cox, 2015. "On Some Principles of Statistical Inference," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 83(2), pages 293-308, August.
    13. Arwa S. Sayegh & Richard D. Connors & James E. Tate, 2018. "Uncertainty Propagation from the Cell Transmission Traffic Flow Model to Emission Predictions: A Data-Driven Approach," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(6), pages 1327-1346, December.
    14. Nezakati, Ensiyeh & Pircalabelu, Eugen, 2021. "Unbalanced distributed estimation and inference for precision matrices," LIDAM Discussion Papers ISBA 2021031, Université catholique de Louvain, Institute of Statistics, Biostatistics and Actuarial Sciences (ISBA).
    15. Dominic Mancini & Gregmar I. Galinato, 2008. "Was It Something I Ate? Implementation of the FDA Seafood HACCP Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(1), pages 28-41.
    16. Xuhua Liu & Xingzhong Xu, 2016. "Confidence distribution inferences in one-way random effects model," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 25(1), pages 59-74, March.
    17. Clémence Sophie Rigaux Ancelet & Frédéric Carlin & Christophe Nguyen‐thé & Isabelle Albert, 2013. "Inferring an Augmented Bayesian Network to Confront a Complex Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment Model with Durability Studies: Application to Bacillus Cereus on a Courgette Purée Production Chain," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(5), pages 877-892, May.
    18. Eugenio Melilli & Piero Veronese, 2024. "Confidence distributions and hypothesis testing," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 65(6), pages 3789-3820, August.
    19. David R. Bickel, 2014. "Small-scale Inference: Empirical Bayes and Confidence Methods for as Few as a Single Comparison," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 82(3), pages 457-476, December.
    20. Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Alberto Pasanisi & Mathieu Couplet, 2017. "A critical discussion and practical recommendations on some issues relevant to the non-probabilistic treatment of uncertainty in engineering risk assessment," Post-Print hal-01652230, HAL.

    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:25:y:2005:i:1:p:39-48. 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.