Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Estimating upper confidence limits for extra risk in quantal multistage models

A J Bailer1, R J Smith

  • 1Department of Mathematics & Statistics, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio 45056.

Risk Analysis : an Official Publication of the Society for Risk Analysis
|December 1, 1994
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Historical Context and Recent Advances in Exposure-Response Estimation for Deriving Occupational Exposure Limits.

Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene·2015
Same author

Estimating infectivity rates and attack windows for two viruses.

Mathematical biosciences·2012
Same author

Lung dosimetry and risk assessment of nanoparticles: evaluating and extending current models in rats and humans.

Inhalation toxicology·2006
Same author

Comparison of unintentional fatal occupational injuries in the Republic of Korea and the United States.

Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention·2004
Same author

Deindustrialisation and the long term decline in fatal occupational injuries.

Occupational and environmental medicine·2004
Same author

Diversity of trends in occupational injury mortality in the United States, 1980-96.

Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention·2003

Likelihood-based and parametric bootstrap methods offer reliable estimation for carcinogenic risk assessment. However, neither method is fully satisfactory for highly curved dose-response patterns in carcinogenicity experiments.

Area of Science:

  • Toxicology
  • Biostatistics
  • Risk Assessment

Background:

  • Multistage models are crucial for carcinogenic risk assessment, estimating tumor probability based on dose.
  • These models project excess cancer risk at low exposure levels, often below experimental doses.
  • Determining upper confidence limits on excess risk is essential for regulatory purposes.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the performance of likelihood-based and bootstrap methods for calculating 95% upper confidence limits on excess cancer risk.
  • To evaluate coverage probabilities and bias of these methods in a simulation study of carcinogenicity experiments.

Main Methods:

  • A simulation study was conducted to assess statistical methods for risk assessment.
  • The study compared a standard likelihood-based method with two bootstrap methods (nonparametric and parametric).

Related Experiment Videos

  • Key metrics evaluated included coverage probabilities and bias of the estimated upper confidence limits.

    • Main Results:

    • The nonparametric bootstrap method showed lower coverage probabilities than the parametric bootstrap and likelihood-based methods.
    • Both parametric bootstrap and likelihood-based methods demonstrated better performance.
    • Relative bias was influenced by the curvature of the dose-response function.

    Conclusions:

    • The likelihood-based method generally provided the best coverage probabilities.
    • The parametric bootstrap method exhibited less bias and variability compared to the likelihood-based method.
    • Neither method is entirely satisfactory for highly curved dose-response patterns in carcinogenicity data.