Author
Listed:
- Louis Anthony Cox Jr.
(Cox Associates)
- Douglas A. Popken
(Cox Associates)
- Richard X. Sun
(Cox Associates)
Abstract
This is the first of two chapters that apply predictive analytics to two very different risk prediction problems. As in the previous two chapters, the challenge in this one is to estimate human health risks from a pathogen in swine using a combination of plausible conservative estimates of relevant risk factors and probabilistic simulation. However, our focus now shifts to predicting how risks would change if some fraction of swine were shifted from totally confined production systems to more humane open systems. Predicting how interventions change risk requires a causal model, as discussed in Chap. 1 . As in Chaps. 5 and 6 , a simple product-of-factors framework is again suitable (see Eq. 7.5). Instead of the terms describing propagation of changes along successive links in a causal chain, with the change in the quantity at each step being equal to a sensitivity or slope factor times the change in its predecessor, many of the factors in this chapter are estimated attribution fractions. These describe the fraction of relevant deaths or illnesses per year in the population due to (i.e., attributed to) and caused by infection with a foodborne pathogen; the fraction of them that are attributed specifically to pork consumption, and so forth. Unlike the attributable risk estimates or attributable fractions criticized in Chap. 2 , which were derived purely from statistical associations, in this application the causal agent of disease, T. Gondii, is known and can be measured. Predictions for effects of interventions are therefore grounded in causal attribution calculations that can be compared to available data on prevalence and infectivity of the relevant causal agent. Chapter 8 will then turn to a pure prediction problem: how well the entries in one column in a table (indicating in vivo carcinogenicity of chemicals, or lack of it, in rodents) can be predicted from entries in other columns, representing results of relatively inexpensive high-throughput screening (HTS) assays. No causal model is required for this task: predictive analytics algorithms alone suffice.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
options:
1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's
web page
whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a
search for a similarly titled item that would be
available.
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:spr:isochp:978-3-319-78242-3_7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.