Figure 4 3. Illustration of three types of scenarios that the TRDM may encounter. (A) The TRL is in between the 5th and 95th percentiles of the uncertainty distribution about risk and therefore TRDM cannot make decision whether to implement exposure mitigation action without additional evidence. (B) The TRL is greater than the 95th percentile of the uncertainty distribution and therefore the TRDM would conclude that no regulatory action is required. (C) The TRL is below the 5th percentile of the uncertainty distribution and therefore TRDM would conclude that regulatory action is required. [Reproduced from Figure 2 from Hagiwara et al. (2022)]

Figure 4-3Illustration of three types of scenarios that the TRDM may encounter. (A) The TRL is in between the 5th and 95th percentiles of the uncertainty distribution about risk and therefore TRDM cannot make decision whether to implement exposure mitigation action without additional evidence. (B) The TRL is greater than the 95th percentile of the uncertainty distribution and therefore the TRDM would conclude that no regulatory action is required. (C) The TRL is below the 5th percentile of the uncertainty distribution and therefore TRDM would conclude that regulatory action is required. [Reproduced from Figure 2 from Hagiwara et al. (2022)]

From: 4, VALUE OF INFORMATION

Cover of Value of Information Case Study on the Human Health and Economic Trade-offs Associated with the Timeliness, Uncertainty, and Costs of the Draft EPA Transcriptomic Assessment Product (ETAP)
Value of Information Case Study on the Human Health and Economic Trade-offs Associated with the Timeliness, Uncertainty, and Costs of the Draft EPA Transcriptomic Assessment Product (ETAP).
Devito M, Farrell P, Hagiwara S, et al.
Washington (DC): U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 2024 Jul.
Copyright Notice

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.