Literature DB >> 1480795

The effect of neglecting correlations when propagating uncertainty and estimating the population distribution of risk.

A E Smith1, P B Ryan, J S Evans.   

Abstract

Interest in examining both the uncertainty and variability in environmental health risk assessments has led to increased use of methods for propagating uncertainty. While a variety of approaches have been described, the advent of both powerful personal computers and commercially available simulation software have led to increased use of Monte Carlo simulation. Although most analysts and regulators are encouraged by these developments, some are concerned that Monte Carlo analysis is being applied uncritically. The validity of any analysis is contingent on the validity of the inputs to the analysis. In the propagation of uncertainty or variability, it is essential that the statistical distribution of input variables are properly specified. Furthermore, any dependencies among the input variables must be considered in the analysis. In light of the potential difficulty in specifying dependencies among input variables, it is useful to consider whether there exist rules of thumb as to when correlations can be safely ignored (i.e., when little overall precision is gained by an additional effort to improve upon an estimation of correlation). We make use of well-known error propagation formulas to develop expressions intended to aid the analyst in situations wherein normally and lognormally distributed variables are linearly correlated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1480795     DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb00703.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Risk Anal        ISSN: 0272-4332            Impact factor:   4.000


  6 in total

1.  Analysis of colorectal cancer screening regimens.

Authors:  R T Clemen; C J Lacke
Journal:  Health Care Manag Sci       Date:  2001-12

2.  Development of a screening tool to assess the temporal risk of pesticides leaching to groundwater using the source, target, vector approach. An Irish case study for shallow groundwater.

Authors:  Herve E Labite; Enda Cummins
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2015-02-07       Impact factor: 2.513

3.  Some Health States Are Better Than Others: Using Health State Rank Order to Improve Probabilistic Analyses.

Authors:  Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert; Hawre J Jalal
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2015-09-16       Impact factor: 2.583

4.  A survey of laboratory and statistical issues related to farmworker exposure studies.

Authors:  Dana B Barr; Doug Landsittel; Marcia Nishioka; Kent Thomas; Brian Curwin; James Raymer; Kirby C Donnelly; Linda McCauley; P Barry Ryan
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 9.031

5.  Using Bayesian-PBPK modeling for assessment of inter-individual variability and subgroup stratification.

Authors:  Markus Krauss; Rolf Burghaus; Jörg Lippert; Mikko Niemi; Pertti Neuvonen; Andreas Schuppert; Stefan Willmann; Lars Kuepfer; Linus Görlitz
Journal:  In Silico Pharmacol       Date:  2013-04-11

6.  Sensitivity of fluvial sediment source apportionment to mixing model assumptions: A Bayesian model comparison.

Authors:  Richard J Cooper; Tobias Krueger; Kevin M Hiscock; Barry G Rawlins
Journal:  Water Resour Res       Date:  2014-11-21       Impact factor: 5.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.