2002
DOI: 10.1080/20028091056854
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Weight-of-Evidence Framework for Assessing Sediment (Or Other) Contamination: Improving Certainty in the Decision-Making Process

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
45
0
7

Year Published

2003
2003
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 97 publications
(53 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
1
45
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…Here, it is important to come to a view by weighing the evidence in as systematic and transparent a way as possible. A developing methodology, based on epidemiological experience, now facilitates this (19)(20)(21).…”
Section: Guarding Against Mistakes and Surprisesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Here, it is important to come to a view by weighing the evidence in as systematic and transparent a way as possible. A developing methodology, based on epidemiological experience, now facilitates this (19)(20)(21).…”
Section: Guarding Against Mistakes and Surprisesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such a sound basis for decision-making is particularly important for sites background contamination/effects, variable substrate types and complex contamination patterns, all of which increase the complexity of the analyses and create potential for confounding effects . The tabular decision matrix, a mean to assess sediment quality WOE remains an effective basis (a logic system) for sediment management decision-making (Burton et al 2002a). Tabular decision matrices can reasonably incorporate a limited level of ordinal response, but should emphasize a strong quantitative evaluation within LOE (like statistical summarization) prior to merging into the more qualitative matrix table .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…PAHs, however, are described as toxic, and some aromatics are potentially carcinogenic (Long and Morgan 1990). The effects of range-low (ERL) values (Burton et al 2002) were considered in evaluating the possible ecotoxicological risks of PAHs in the study area. The measured concentrations of PAHs were then compared with their ERL levels.…”
Section: Environmental Significancementioning
confidence: 99%