IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v18y1998i3p293-297.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On Summarizing Group Exposures in Risk Assessment: Is an Arithmetic Mean or a Geometric Mean More Appropriate?

Author

Listed:
  • Kenny S. Crump

Abstract

Since substantial bias can result from assigning some type of mean exposure to a group, risk assessments based on epidemiological data should avoid the grouping of data whenever possible. However, ungrouped data are frequently unavailable, and the question arises as to whether an arithmetic or geometric mean is the most appropriate summary measure of exposure. It is argued in this paper that one should use the type of mean for which the total risk that would result if every member of the population was exposed to the mean level is as close as possible to the actual total population risk. Using this criterion an arithmetic mean is always preferred over a geometric mean whenever the dose response is convex. In each of several data sets examined in this paper for which the dose response was not convex, an arithmetic mean was still preferred based on this criterion.

Suggested Citation

  • Kenny S. Crump, 1998. "On Summarizing Group Exposures in Risk Assessment: Is an Arithmetic Mean or a Geometric Mean More Appropriate?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(3), pages 293-297, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:18:y:1998:i:3:p:293-297
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1998.tb01296.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1998.tb01296.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1998.tb01296.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. Kenny Crump & John Viren & Abraham Silvers & Harvey Clewell III & Jeff Gearhart & Annette Shipp, 1995. "Reanalysis of Dose‐Response Data from the Iraqi Methylmercury Poisoning Episode," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 523-532, August.
    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. Harvey J. Clewell & Gregory A. Lawrence & Donald B. Calne & Kenny S. Crump, 2003. "Determination of an Occupational Exposure Guideline for Manganese Using the Benchmark Method," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(5), pages 1031-1046, October.
    2. Sara Gustavsson & Björn Fagerberg & Gerd Sallsten & Eva M. Andersson, 2014. "Regression Models for Log-Normal Data: Comparing Different Methods for Quantifying the Association between Abdominal Adiposity and Biomarkers of Inflammation and Insulin Resistance," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, March.

    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. Katsuyuki Murata & Esben Budtz‐Jørgensen & Philippe Grandjean, 2002. "Benchmark Dose Calculations for Methylmercury‐Associated Delays on Evoked Potential Latencies in Two Cohorts of Children," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 465-474, June.
    2. Esben Budtz-Jørgensen & Niels Keiding & Philippe Grandjean, 2001. "Benchmark Dose Calculation from Epidemiological Data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 698-706, September.

    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:18:y:1998:i:3:p:293-297. 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.