Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
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 Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by BROWN, K. G.
Right arrow Articles by ERDREICH, L. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by BROWN, K. G.
Right arrow Articles by ERDREICH, L. S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1989 Oxford University Press

research-article

Statistical Uncertainty in the No-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level1

KENNETH G. BROWN2 and LINDA S. ERDREICH1

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Criteria and Assessment Office 26 West St ClairSt, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268

Received December 15, 1987; accepted January 23, 1989

The no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) is a dose value that U.S. EPA reduces by uncertainty factors (UF) and modfying factors (MF) to obtain a reference dose (RfD) for input to regulatory decision making. Whether the true added risk at the NOAEL is below an acceptable level, however, is a source of statistical uncertainty itself. As several authors have previously noted, the probability that added risk at the NOAEL is not negligibly small increases as sample sizes decrease. This is because the definition of the NOAEL statistically controls for the chance of a false-positive error, but not for a false-negative error. The false-positive rate is the test level set by the user in testing for a statistically significant dose effect, typically 0.05. When it is held fixed, the increase in statistical uncertainty as sample size decreases produces an increase in the false-negative rate. Hence, the fewer data available for statistical inference, the higher the expected value of the NOAEL and the less toxic an agent is likely to appear. The solution lies in calculating the probability that a statistical procedure used will detect the maximum added risk acceptable for health regulation (the "power" at that added risk). If the observed response in a dose group is not significantly elevated relative to the control group, and the power for detecting a difference is low as well, then the statistical evidence is inconclusive. In such a case, additional data or other sources of information are needed for evaluating added risk. These concepts are illustrated for examples from the literature with dichotomous (quantal response) data and categorical (severity) data, using a new statistical procdure.


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.