IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v37y2017i5p879-892.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Part II: Quantitative Evaluation of Choices Used in Setting Noncancer Chronic Human Health Reference Values Across Organizations

Author

Listed:
  • Elizabeth Holman
  • Royce Francis
  • George Gray

Abstract

Environmental and public health organizations, including the World Health Organization (WHO) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), develop human health reference values (HHRV) that set “safe” levels of exposure to noncarcinogens. Here, we systematically analyze chronic HHRVs from four organizations: USEPA, Health Canada, RIVM (the Netherlands), and the U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. This study is an extension of our earlier work and both closely examines the choices made in setting HHRVs and presents a quantitative method for identifying the primary factors influencing HHRV agreement or disagreement.(1) We evaluated 171 organizational comparisons, developing a quantitative method for identifying the factors to which HHRV agreement (that is, when both organizations considering the same data set the identical HHRV values) is most sensitive. To conduct this analysis, a Bayesian belief network was built using expert judgment, including the specific science policy choices analysis made in the context of setting an HHRV. Based on a sensitivity of findings analysis, HHRV agreement is most sensitive to the point of departure value, followed by the total uncertainty factor (UF), critical study, critical effect, animal model, and point of departure approach. This analysis also considered the specific impacts of individual UFs, with the database UF and the subchronic‐to‐chronic UF being identified as primary factors impacting the total UF differences observed across organizations. The sensitivity of findings analysis results were strengthened and confirmed by frequency analyses evaluating which choices most often disagreed when the HHRV and the total UF disagreed.

Suggested Citation

  • Elizabeth Holman & Royce Francis & George Gray, 2017. "Part II: Quantitative Evaluation of Choices Used in Setting Noncancer Chronic Human Health Reference Values Across Organizations," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(5), pages 879-892, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:37:y:2017:i:5:p:879-892
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.12699
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12699
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.12699?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. Jeffrey C. Swartout & Paul S. Price & Michael L. Dourson & Heather L. Carlson‐Lynch & Russell E. Keenan, 1998. "A Probabilistic Framework for the Reference Dose (Probabilistic RfD)," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(3), pages 271-282, June.
    2. Diana G. Effio & Oliver Kroner & Andrew Maier & William Hayes & Alison Willis & Joan Strawson, 2013. "A Look at State‐Level Risk Assessment in the United States: Making Decisions in the Absence of Federal Risk Values," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(1), pages 54-67, January.
    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. Elizabeth Holman & Royce Francis & George Gray, 2017. "Part I––Comparing Noncancer Chronic Human Health Reference Values: An Analysis of Science Policy Choices," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(5), pages 861-878, May.
    2. Kevin P. Brand & J Lorenz Rhomberg & John S. Evans, 1999. "Estimating Noncancer Uncertainty Factors: Are Ratios NOAELs Informative?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 295-308, April.
    3. Roger Cooke, 2010. "Conundrums with Uncertainty Factors," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 330-339, March.
    4. Paul S. Price & Heli M. Hollnagel & Jack M. Zabik, 2009. "Characterizing the Noncancer Toxicity of Mixtures Using Concepts from the TTC and Quantitative Models of Uncertainty in Mixture Toxicity," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(11), pages 1534-1548, November.
    5. Michael Pelekis & Mark J. Nicolich & Joseph S. Gauthier, 2003. "Probabilistic Framework for the Estimation of the Adult and Child Toxicokinetic Intraspecies Uncertainty Factors," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(6), pages 1239-1255, December.
    6. Martí Nadal & Vikas Kumar & Marta Schuhmacher & José L. Domingo, 2008. "Applicability of a Neuroprobabilistic Integral Risk Index for the Environmental Management of Polluted Areas: A Case Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 271-286, April.
    7. Scott M. Bartell & Elaine M. Faustman, 1998. "Comments on “An Approach for Modeling Noncancer Dose Responses with an Emphasis on Uncertainty” and “A Probabilistic Framework for the Reference Dose (Probabilistic RfD)”," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(6), pages 663-664, 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:37:y:2017:i:5:p:879-892. 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.