IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v14y1994i4p389-393.html

Measures of Compounding Conservatism in Probabilistic Risk Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Alison C. Cullen

Abstract

Concern about the degree of uncertainty and potential conservatism in deterministic point estimates of risk has prompted researchers to turn increasingly to probabilistic methods for risk assessment. With Monte Carlo simulation techniques, distributions of risk reflecting uncertainty and/or variability are generated as an alternative. In this paper the compounding of conservatism(1) between the level associated with point estimate inputs selected from probability distributions and the level associated with the deterministic value of risk calculated using these inputs is explored. Two measures of compounded conservatism are compared and contrasted. The first measure considered, F, is defined as the ratio of the risk value, Rd, calculated deterministically as a function of n inputs each at the jth percentile of its probability distribution, and the risk value, Rj that falls at the jth percentile of the simulated risk distribution (i.e., F=Rd/Rj). The percentile of the simulated risk distribution which corresponds to the deterministic value, Rd, serves as a second measure of compounded conservatism. Analytical results for simple products of lognormal distributions are presented. In addition, a numerical treatment of several complex cases is presented using five simulation analyses from the literature to illustrate. Overall, there are cases in which conservatism compounds dramatically for deterministic point estimates of risk constructed from upper percentiles of input parameters, as well as those for which the effect is less notable. The analytical and numerical techniques discussed are intended to help analysts explore the factors that influence the magnitude of compounding conservatism in specific cases.

Suggested Citation

  • Alison C. Cullen, 1994. "Measures of Compounding Conservatism in Probabilistic Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 389-393, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:14:y:1994:i:4:p:389-393
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00257.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00257.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00257.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. Kimberly M. Thompson & David E. Burmaster & Edmund A.C. Crouch3, 1992. "Monte Carlo Techniques for Quantitative Uncertainty Analysis in Public Health Risk Assessments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 53-63, March.
    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. Katherine E. Von Stackelberg & Dmitriy Burmistrov & Donna J. Vorhees & Todd Bridges & Igor Linkov, 2002. "Importance of Uncertainty and Variability to Predicted Risks from Trophic Transfer of PCBs in Dredged Sediments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 499-512, June.
    2. Jane G. Pouzou & Alison C. Cullen & Michael G. Yost & John C. Kissel & Richard A. Fenske, 2018. "Comparative Probabilistic Assessment of Occupational Pesticide Exposures Based on Regulatory Assessments," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(6), pages 1223-1238, June.
    3. Viscusi, W. Kip & Hamilton, James T. & Dockins, P. Christen, 1997. "Conservative versus Mean Risk Assessments: Implications for Superfund Policies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 187-206, November.
    4. Paul S. Price & Steave H. Su & Jeff R. Harrington & Russell E. Keenan, 1996. "Uncertainty and Variation in Indirect Exposure Assessments: An Analysis of Exposure to Tetrachlorodibenzo‐p‐Dioxin from a Beef Consumption Pathway," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(2), pages 263-277, 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. Christopher Dickey & Regina M. Santella & Dale Hattis & Deliang Tang & Yanzhi Hsu & Tom Cooper & Tie‐Lan Young & Frederica P. Perera, 1997. "Variability in PAH‐DNA Adduct Measurements in Peripheral Mononuclear Cells: Implications for Quantitative Cancer Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(5), pages 649-656, October.
    2. Brent Finley & Deborah Proctor & Paul Scott & Natalie Harrington & Dennis Paustenbach & Paul Price, 1994. "Recommended Distributions for Exposure Factors Frequently Used in Health Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 533-553, August.
    3. Maged M. Hamed & Philip B. Bedient, 1997. "On the Effect of Probability Distributions of Input Variables in Public Health Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 97-105, February.
    4. Hou, Tianfeng & Nuyens, Dirk & Roels, Staf & Janssen, Hans, 2019. "Quasi-Monte Carlo based uncertainty analysis: Sampling efficiency and error estimation in engineering applications," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    5. Frédéric Dor & Pascal Empereur‐Bissonnet & Denis Zmirou & Vincent Nedellec & Jean‐Marie Haguenoer & Frans Jongeneelen & Alain Person & William Dab & Colin Ferguson, 2003. "Validation of Multimedia Models Assessing Exposure to PAHs—The SOLEX Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(5), pages 1047-1057, October.
    6. Alan H. Stern, 1993. "Re‐evaluation of the Reference Dose for Methylmercury and Assessment of Current Exposure Levels," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(3), pages 355-364, June.
    7. Bas Groot Koerkamp & Theo Stijnen & Milton C. Weinstein & M. G. Myriam Hunink, 2011. "The Combined Analysis of Uncertainty and Patient Heterogeneity in Medical Decision Models," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(4), pages 650-661, July.
    8. A. E. Ades & S. Cliffe, 2002. "Markov Chain Monte Carlo Estimation of a Multiparameter Decision Model: Consistency of Evidence and the Accurate Assessment of Uncertainty," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 22(4), pages 359-371, August.
    9. Ana P. Johnson-Masotti & Purushottam W. Laud & Raymond G. Hoffmann & Matthew J. Hayat & Steven D. Pinkerton, 2004. "A Bayesian Approach to Net Health Benefits: An Illustration and Application to Modeling HIV Prevention," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 24(6), pages 634-653, November.
    10. Paul S. Price & Cynthia L. Curry & Philip E. Goodrum & Michael N. Gray & Jane I. McCrodden & Natalie W. Harrington & Heather Carlson‐Lynch & Russell E. Keenan, 1996. "Monte Carlo Modeling of Time‐Dependent Exposures Using a Microexposure Event Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 339-348, June.
    11. A. E. Ades & G. Lu, 2003. "Correlations Between Parameters in Risk Models: Estimation and Propagation of Uncertainty by Markov Chain Monte Carlo," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(6), pages 1165-1172, December.
    12. A. E. Ades & G. Lu & J. P. T. Higgins, 2005. "The Interpretation of Random-Effects Meta-Analysis in Decision Models," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 25(6), pages 646-654, November.
    13. Adam M. Finkel, 1994. "Stepping Out of Your Own Shadow: A Didactic Example of How Facing Uncertainty Can Improve Decision‐Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(5), pages 751-761, October.
    14. Brent L. Finley & Paul K. Scott & Douglas A. Mayhall, 1994. "Development of a Standard Soil‐to‐Skin Adherence Probability Density Function for Use in Monte Carlo Analyses of Dermal Exposure," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 555-569, August.
    15. Barbara J. Petersen & Leila M. Barraj & Larry R. Muenz & Stanley L. Harrison, 1994. "An Alternative Approach to Dietary Exposure Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(6), pages 913-916, December.
    16. A. E. Ades & G. Lu & K. Claxton, 2004. "Expected Value of Sample Information Calculations in Medical Decision Modeling," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 24(2), pages 207-227, March.
    17. Ning Qin & Ayibota Tuerxunbieke & Qin Wang & Xing Chen & Rong Hou & Xiangyu Xu & Yunwei Liu & Dongqun Xu & Shu Tao & Xiaoli Duan, 2021. "Key Factors for Improving the Carcinogenic Risk Assessment of PAH Inhalation Exposure by Monte Carlo Simulation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-14, October.
    18. Kenneth T. Bogen, 1995. "Methods to Approximate Joint Uncertainty and Variability in Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 411-419, June.
    19. A. E. Ades & Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher, 2006. "Evidence synthesis, parameter correlation and probabilistic sensitivity analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(4), pages 373-381, April.
    20. K. Claxton & P. J. Neumannn & S. S. Araki & M. C. Weinstein, "undated". "Bayesian Value-of-Information Analysis: An Application to a Policy Model of Alzheimer's Disease," Discussion Papers 00/39, Department of Economics, University of York.

    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:14:y:1994:i:4:p:389-393. 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.