1992
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb01307.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Monte Carlo Techniques for Quantitative Uncertainty Analysis in Public Health Risk Assessments

Abstract: Most public health risk assessments assume and combine a series of average, conservative, and worst-case values to derive a conservative point estimate of risk. This procedure has major limitations. This paper demonstrates a new methodology for extended uncertainty analyses in public health risk assessments using Monte Carlo techniques. The extended method begins as do some conventional methods--with the preparation of a spreadsheet to estimate exposure and risk. This method, however, continues by modeling key… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
102
0

Year Published

1996
1996
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 205 publications
(103 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
1
102
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Most of the literature on MCA (e.g., Thompson, et al 1992;Burmaster and Anderson 1993) suggests that for each MCA an initial sensitivity analysis should be implemented to determine which parameters should be varied and which can safely be held constant without significantly affecting the final risk distribution. The authors agree that in most INEL MCA applications, an initial sensitivity analysis should be implemented.…”
Section: Sensitivity Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Most of the literature on MCA (e.g., Thompson, et al 1992;Burmaster and Anderson 1993) suggests that for each MCA an initial sensitivity analysis should be implemented to determine which parameters should be varied and which can safely be held constant without significantly affecting the final risk distribution. The authors agree that in most INEL MCA applications, an initial sensitivity analysis should be implemented.…”
Section: Sensitivity Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Less extreme percentiles in the tails of the distribution can also be affected. For example, Thompson et al (1992) note that when they repeated a simulation of 10,000 samples, the 95th percentile was not quite within 1% of the original simulation's estimate of the 95th percentile.…”
Section: Assessmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In the 1990s there has been an emphasis on understanding the distribution of susceptibility (29), which was formerly represented by a single default (3), as well as on how to deal with the uncertainties inherent in risk assessment. Formerly dismissed as noise, it is now fashionable to attempt to quantify (6,73) as well as communicate uncertainty (72). Future advances will focus extensively on case-specific models, on use of biomarkers to assess exposure (38a, 48), on risk assessment for mixtures (47), and on quantifying uncertainty.…”
Section: Risk Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%