Bivariate Distributions for Height and Weight of Men and Women in the United States

Brainard, Jennifer; Burmaster, David E.

doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1992.tb00674.x

Cited by 72 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Brainard and Burmaster ( 1992) used the same data to estimate the lognormal distributions for adults, and discovered that female adults could be better represented by a mixture of two distributions. It was assumed that for females distribution A comprises 46% of the popuation and distribution B comprises 54% of the population.…”

Section: Exposure Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeled estimates of chlorpyrifos exposure and dose for the Minnesota and Arizona NHEXAS populations

Buck

Özkaynak

Xue³

et al. 2001

J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a probabilistic, multimedia, multipathway exposure model and assessment for chlorpyrifos developed as part of the National Human Exposure Assessment Survey ( NHEXAS) . The model was constructed using available information prior to completion of the NHEXAS study. It simulates the distribution of daily aggregate and pathway -specific chlorpyrifos absorbed dose in the general population of the State of Arizona ( AZ) and in children aged 3 ± 12 years residing in Minneapolis ± St. Paul, Minnesota ( MSP) . Pathways included were inhalation of indoor and outdoor air, dietary ingestion, non -dietary ingestion of dust and soil, and dermal contact with dust and soil. Probability distributions for model input parameters were derived from the available literature, and input values were chosen to represent chlorpyrifos concentrations and demographics in AZ and MSP to the extent possible. When the NHEXAS AZ and MSP data become available, they can be compared to the distributions derived in this and other prototype modeling assessments to test the adequacy of this pre -NHEXAS model assessment. Although pathway -specific absorbed dose estimates differed between AZ and MSP due to differences in model inputs between simulated adults and children, the aggregate model results and general findings for simulated AZ and MSP populations were similar. The major route of chlorpyrifos intake was food ingestion, followed by indoor air inhalation. Two -stage Monte Carlo simulation was used to derive estimates of both interindividual variability and uncertainty in the estimated distributions. The variability in the model results reflects the difference in activity patterns, exposure factors, and concentrations contacted by individuals during their daily activities. Based on the coefficient of variation, indoor air inhalation and dust ingestion were most variable relative to the mean, primarily because of variability in concentrations due to use or no -use of pesticides. Uncertainty analyses indicated a factor of 10 ± 30 for uncertainty of model predictions of 10th, 50th, and 90th percentiles. The greatest source of uncertainty in the model stems from the definition of no household pesticide use as no use in the past year. Because chlorpyrifos persists in the residential environment for longer than a year, the modeled estimates are likely to be low. More information on pesticide usage and environmental concentrations measured at different post -application times is needed to refine and evaluate this and other pesticide exposure models.

show abstract

Section: Exposure Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeled estimates of chlorpyrifos exposure and dose for the Minnesota and Arizona NHEXAS populations

Buck

Özkaynak

Xue³

et al. 2001

J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The benzene concentrations acquired by the solute transport modeling are served as bases for ELCR modeling. Other parameters, including human ingestion rate, exposure frequency, average exposure duration, average body weight, and averaging time will be expressed as PDFs, and the detailed data are referred to literatures (see Table 2; Liu et al 2004;USOHEA 1989;Brainard and Burmaster 1992). Liu et al (2004) …”

Section: Characterization Of Uncertaintiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…fuzzy sets) might better reflect such information and help mitigate influences of decision-makers' biased or even false decisions (Liu et al 2004). Thus, the health risk assessment process may involve uncertain inputs that are expressed in multiple formats and should be systematically handled by an integrated risk assessment framework (Liu et al 2004;Brainard and Burmaster 1992).…”

Section: Health Risk Assessment Under Uncertaintymentioning

confidence: 99%

An Integrated Simulation-Assessment Approach for Evaluating Health Risks of Groundwater Contamination Under Multiple Uncertainties

Yang

Huang

Qin

2010

Water Resour Manage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An integrated simulation-assessment approach (ISAA) was developed in this study to systematically tackle multiple uncertainties associated with hydrocarbon contaminant transport in subsurface and assessment of carcinogenic health risk. The fuzzy vertex analysis technique and the Latin hypercube sampling (LHS) based stochastic simulation approach were combined into a fuzzy-Latin hypercube sampling (FLHS) simulation model and was used for predicting contaminant transport in subsurface under coupled fuzzy and stochastic uncertainties. The fuzzy-rule-based risk assessment (FRRA) was used for interpreting the general risk level through fuzzy inference to deal with the possibilistic uncertainties associated with both FLHS simulations and health-risk criteria. A study case involving health risk assessment for a benzene-contaminated site was examined. The study results demonstrated the proposed ISAA was useful for evaluating risks within a system containing complicated uncertainties and interactions and providing supports for identifying cost-effective site management strategies.

show abstract

“…The lognormal distributions from Brainard and Burmaster ( 1992 ) , as given in the Exposure Factors Sourcebook ( AIHC, 1994 ) , were used for body weight distributions. For men, the geometric mean was 76.83 kg and the geometric standard deviation (SD ) was 1.18.…”

Section: Parameters Used For Both Gas and Particulate Phases Estimationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Doses and lung burdens of environmental tobacco smoke constituents in nonsmoking workplaces

Me²,

et al. 2000

J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bivariate Distributions for Height and Weight of Men and Women in the United States

Cited by 72 publications

References 4 publications

Modeled estimates of chlorpyrifos exposure and dose for the Minnesota and Arizona NHEXAS populations

Modeled estimates of chlorpyrifos exposure and dose for the Minnesota and Arizona NHEXAS populations

An Integrated Simulation-Assessment Approach for Evaluating Health Risks of Groundwater Contamination Under Multiple Uncertainties

Doses and lung burdens of environmental tobacco smoke constituents in nonsmoking workplaces

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About