Library

feed icon rss

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    ISSN: 1539-6924
    Keywords: Variability ; uncertainty ; maximum likelihood ; bootstrap simulation ; Monte Carlo simulation
    Source: Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2000
    Topics: Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering
    Notes: Abstract Variability arises due to differences in the value of a quantity among different members of a population. Uncertainty arises due to lack of knowledge regarding the true value of a quantity for a given member of a population. We describe and evaluate two methods for quantifying both variability and uncertainty. These methods, bootstrap simulation and a likelihood-based method, are applied to three datasets. The datasets include a synthetic sample of 19 values from a Lognormal distribution, a sample of nine values obtained from measurements of the PCB concentration in leafy produce, and a sample of five values for the partitioning of chromium in the flue gas desulfurization system of coal-fired power plants. For each of these datasets, we employ the two methods to characterize uncertainty in the arithmetic mean and standard deviation, cumulative distribution functions based upon fitted parametric distributions, the 95th percentile of variability, and the 63rd percentile of uncertainty for the 81st percentile of variability. The latter is intended to show that it is possible to describe any point within the uncertain frequency distribution by specifying an uncertainty percentile and a variability percentile. Using the bootstrap method, we compare results based upon use of the method of matching moments and the method of maximum likelihood for fitting distributions to data. Our results indicate that with only 5–19 data points as in the datasets we have evaluated, there is substantial uncertainty based upon random sampling error. Both the boostrap and likelihood-based approaches yield comparable uncertainty estimates in most cases.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Electronic Resource
    Electronic Resource
    Springer
    Risk analysis 19 (1999), S. 711-726 
    ISSN: 1539-6924
    Keywords: variability ; exposure ; susceptibility ; risk assessment ; pharmacokinetics ; pharmacodynamics
    Source: Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2000
    Topics: Energy, Environment Protection, Nuclear Power Engineering
    Notes: Abstract This paper reviews existing data on the variability in parameters relevant for health risk analyses. We cover both exposure-related parameters and parameters related to individual susceptibility to toxicity. The toxicity/susceptibility data base under construction is part of a longer term research effort to lay the groundwork for quantitative distributional analyses of non-cancer toxic risks. These data are broken down into a variety of parameter types that encompass different portions of the pathway from external exposure to the production of biological responses. The discrete steps in this pathway, as we now conceive them, are: •Contact Rate (Breathing rates per body weight; fish consumption per body weight) •Uptake or Absorption as a Fraction of Intake or Contact Rate •General Systemic Availability Net of First Pass Elimination and Dilution via Distribution Volume (e.g., initial blood concentration per mg/kg of uptake) •Systemic Elimination (half life or clearance) •Active Site Concentration per Systemic Blood or Plasma Concentration •Physiological Parameter Change per Active Site Concentration (expressed as the dose required to make a given percentage change in different people, or the dose required to achieve some proportion of an individual's maximum response to the drug or toxicant) •Functional Reserve Capacity–Change in Baseline Physiological Parameter Needed to Produce a Biological Response or Pass a Criterion of Abnormal Function Comparison of the amounts of variability observed for the different parameter types suggests that appreciable variability is associated with the final step in the process–differences among people in “functional reserve capacity.” This has the implication that relevant information for estimating effective toxic susceptibility distributions may be gleaned by direct studies of the population distributions of key physiological parameters in people that are not exposed to the environmental and occupational toxicants that are thought to perturb those parameters. This is illustrated with some recent observations of the population distributions of Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol from the second and third National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys.
    Type of Medium: Electronic Resource
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...