Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hunter Youngren, S.
Right arrow Articles by Barraj, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hunter Youngren, S.
Right arrow Articles by Barraj, L.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Ann. occup. Hyg., Vol. 45, No. 90001, pp. S49-S54, 2001
© 2001 British Occupational Hygiene Society
Published by Oxford University Press

Challenges of probabilistic assessment of operator and residential non-dietary exposure

Susan Hunter Youngren, Mark A. Youngren and Leila Barraj

Novigen Sciences, Inc., 1730 Rhode Island Ave, NW, Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20036, USA MITRE Corporation, 1820 Dolley Madison Blvd, McLean, VA 22102, USA

Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: +1-202-293-5374; Fax: +1-202-293-5377

Received 5 October, 2000; Accepted 11 December, 2000.

There are several challenges in the area of probabilistic exposure assessment of operator and residential non-dietary exposure: the proper uses of the available data and how to adequately understand and characterize the uncertainty in the assessment. The adequacy of the data can be assessed either qualitatively or quantitatively. If a qualitative assessment were deemed acceptable, then expert judgement would be the primary methodology. However, in most instances a quantitative assessment of adequacy will be possible and will provide more pertinent information. In that case statistical techniques should be used. Understanding and characterizing uncertainty is a separate challenge, which is often ignored. Instead risk assessors present characterizing the variability in the assessment as a characterization of both uncertainty and variability. This can lead to misinterpretation of the outputs of the assessment. Interpretation of outputs can be discussed on two levels — familiarizing the risk managers and the policy makers with the types of outputs resulting from a probabilistic assessment (graphs and/or matrices of values) as well as explaining the meanings and implications of the values. The burden is placed on the assessor to clearly reflect to the risk managers and policy makers the way on which variability and uncertainty were handled in the assessment. In advising the risk managers and policy makers, it is important to remind them of the purpose of conducting a probabilistic risk assessment: the probabilistic assessment allows a means to characterize the degrees of uncertainty and variability in terms of probabilities.

Monte Carlo assessment; probabilistic assessment; uncertainty; variability; exposure assessment


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.