A Deliberative Method for Ranking Risks (II): Evaluation of Validity and Agreement among Risk Managers

A deliberative method for ranking risks was evaluated in a study involving 218 risk managers. Both holistic and multiattribute procedures were used to assess individual and group rankings of health and safety risks facing students at a fictitious middle school. Consistency between the rankings that emerged from these two procedures was reasonably high for individuals and for groups, suggesting that these procedures capture an underlying construct of riskiness. Participants reported high levels of satisfaction with their groups' decision-making processes and the resulting rankings, and these reports were corroborated by regression analyses. Risk rankings were similar across individuals and groups, even though individuals and groups did not always agree on the relative importance of risk attributes. Lower consistency between the risk rankings from the holistic and multiattribute procedures and lower agreement among individuals and groups regarding these rankings were observed for a set of high-variance risks. Nonetheless, the generally high levels of consistency, satisfaction, and agreement suggest that this deliberative method is capable of producing risk rankings that can serve as informative inputs to public risk-management decision making.     

Development and application of a dose–response model for Elizabethkingia spp

Elizabethkingia spp. are common environmental pathogens responsible for infections in more vulnerable populations. Although the exposure routes of concern are not well understood, some hospital-associated outbreaks have indicated possible waterborne transmission. In order to facilitate quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) for Elizabethkingia spp., this study fit dose–response models to frog and mice datasets that evaluated intramuscular and intraperitoneal exposure to Elizabethkingia spp. The frog datasets could be pooled, and the exact beta-Poisson model was the best fitting model with optimized parameters α  = 0.52 and β = 86,351. Using the exact beta-Poisson model, the dose of Elizabethkingia miricola resulting in a 50% morbidity response (LD₅₀) was estimated to be approximately 237,000 CFU. The model developed herein was used to estimate the probability of infection for a hospital patient under a modeled exposure scenario involving a contaminated medical device and reported Elizabethkingia spp. concentrations isolated from hospital sinks after an outbreak. The median exposure dose was approximately 3 CFU/insertion event, and the corresponding median risk of infection was 3.4E-05. The median risk estimated in this case study was lower than the 3% attack rate observed in a previous outbreak, however, there are noted gaps pertaining to the possible concentrations of Elizabethkingia spp. in tap water and the most likely exposure routes. This is the first dose–response model developed for Elizabethkingia spp. thus enabling future risk assessments to help determine levels of risk and potential effective risk management strategies.