A general framework to deal with uncertainty in expert panel risk assessment

Archive ouverte

Fraize-Frontier, Sandrine | Albert, Isabelle | Boudia, Soraya | Bonvallot, Nathalie | Crepet, Amélie | Glorennec, Philippe | Makowski, David | Saegerman, Claude | Sanaa, Moez | Tressou, Jessica | Brochot, Céline

Edité par CCSD -

International audience. The importance of clarifying and disclosing uncertainties in risk assessment (RA) has been acknowledged for several decades. However, even today, these uncertainties do not receive the attention they deserve to well inform decision makers. To overcome this situation, diverse regulators, health and safety agencies, and other bodies involving in RA at national, European or international level have recently mobilized themselves by reasserting the need to integrate uncertainty analysis in the RA process and making practical recommendations. The French agency for food, environmental and occupational health and safety (Anses) is one of them. This work presents the general framework developed by the Anses Expert Working Group on Methodology in Risk Assessment. Two critical points were addressed: A typology of uncertainties and a homogenized approach to deal with uncertainty analysis in different areas (human health related to the environment, work and food, animal health and welfare, and plant health). The proposed typology is divided into four classes (Context, Corpus of knowledge, Assessment methodology and Communication), according to the logic of an expert appraisal process. A five-step iterative approach, systematically preceded by a stage for planning the assessment, was proposed as a generic approach of uncertainty analysis. Especially, the importance of considering the decision-making context of the assessment from the planning stage is stressed. The iterative approach was developed to be flexible enough to enable the assessors ensure the analysis is proportionate to and fit for purpose of the assessment As part of a testing stage, the general framework was applied to different case studies dealing with diverse areas (health RA in humans, animals and plants). This testing phase was carried out in collaboration with different expert panels. It concluded that the generic and flexible nature of the proposed framework should be able to harmonize the practices in RA.

Consulter en ligne

Suggestions

Du même auteur

Prise en compte de l’incertitude en évaluation des risques : revue de la littérature et recommandations pour l’Anses.. Prise en compte de l’incertitude en évaluation des risques : revue de la littérature et recommandations pour l’Anses.: Avis de l’AnsesRapport d’expertise collective

Archive ouverte | Makowski, David | CCSD

Les objectifs de cette autosaisine sont de : - décrire les pratiques actuelles de l’Agence et les comparer avec les pratiques d’autres organismes/agences sanitaires ; - proposer une typologie/classification des incertitudes ; - p...

Évaluation du poids des preuves à l’Anses : revue critique de la littérature et recommandations à l’étape d’identification des dangers

Archive ouverte | Makowski, David | CCSD

Objet de la saisine Dans l’objectif d’améliorer la transparence du processus d’expertise requise pour un organisme certifié ISO 9001, l’Anses a confié au Groupe de Travail « Méthodologie de l'Évaluation des Risques » (GT MER) la c...

Estimating human exposure to pyrethroids’ mixtures from biomonitoring data using physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling

Archive ouverte | Quindroit, Paul | CCSD

International audience. Human biomonitoring data provide evidence to exposure of environmental chemicals. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modelling together with an adequate exposure scenario allows to ...

Chargement des enrichissements...