IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v26y2006i3p583-584.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Epidemiologic Data and Standards: Response to Kundi

Author

Listed:
  • L. Kheifets
  • J. Sahl
  • R. Shimkhada
  • M. Repacholi

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • L. Kheifets & J. Sahl & R. Shimkhada & M. Repacholi, 2006. "Epidemiologic Data and Standards: Response to Kundi," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(3), pages 583-584, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:26:y:2006:i:3:p:583-584
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00779.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00779.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00779.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. Sander Greenland & Leeka Kheifets, 2006. "Leukemia Attributable to Residential Magnetic Fields: Results from Analyses Allowing for Study Biases," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 471-482, April.
    2. Detlof Von Winterfeldt & Thomas Eppel & John Adams & Raymond Neutra & Vincent DelPizzo, 2004. "Managing Potential Health Risks from Electric Powerlines: A Decision Analysis Caught in Controversy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(6), pages 1487-1502, December.
    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. Michael J. O'Carroll & Denis L. Henshaw, 2007. "Comment on “Developing Policy in the Face of Scientific Uncertainty: Interpreting 0.3 μT or 0.4 μT Cutpoints from EMF Epidemiologic Studies” by Kheifets et al. in Risk Analysis, 25(4), 927–935," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 285-287, April.

    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. Detlof von Winterfeldt & Robert Kavet & Stephen Peck & Mayank Mohan & Gordon Hazen, 2012. "The Value of Environmental Information without Control of Subsequent Decisions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(12), pages 2113-2132, December.
    2. Shaiela Kandel & John Swanson & Leeka Kheifets, 2016. "Health‐Economics Analyses Applied to ELF Electric and Magnetic Fields," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(6), pages 1277-1286, June.
    3. Enrique A. Navarro-Camba & Jaume Segura-García & Claudio Gomez-Perretta, 2018. "Exposure to 50 Hz Magnetic Fields in Homes and Areas Surrounding Urban Transformer Stations in Silla (Spain): Environmental Impact Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-11, July.
    4. G. Hugh Sidaway, 2008. "Environmental and social impacts of electricity utilization: broadening the debate," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 307-314, September.
    5. Vicki Bier, 2020. "The Role of Decision Analysis in Risk Analysis: A Retrospective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2207-2217, November.
    6. David M. Hassenzahl, 2006. "Implications of Excessive Precision for Risk Comparisons: Lessons from the Past Four Decades," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(1), pages 265-276, February.
    7. von Winterfeldt, Detlof & Fasolo, Barbara, 2009. "Structuring decision problems: A case study and reflections for practitioners," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(3), pages 857-866, December.
    8. Michael Kundi, 2006. "Comment on “Developing Policy in the Face of Scientific Uncertainty: Interpreting 0.3 μT or 0.4 μT Cutpoints from EMF Epidemiologic Studies” by Kheifets et al. in Risk Analysis, 25(4), 927–935," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(3), pages 579-581, June.
    9. Ralph L. Keeney & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2011. "A Value Model for Evaluating Homeland Security Decisions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(9), pages 1470-1487, September.
    10. Mueller, Christoph Emanuel & Keil, Silke Inga & Bauer, Christian, 2019. "Underground cables vs. overhead lines: Quasi-experimental evidence for the effects on public risk expectations, attitudes, and protest behavior," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 456-466.
    11. Riadh W. Y. Habash, 2010. "Environmental and Human Impact of Electromagnetic Energy: Views toward Technology and Risk," Energy & Environment, , vol. 21(2), pages 107-113, March.

    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:26:y:2006:i:3:p:583-584. 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.