Premium
A Conceptual Framework to Assess the Risks of Human Disease Following Exposure to Pathogens
Author(s) -
Ronald P. Brown,
Gunther F. Craun,
Alfred Dufour,
Joe Eisenberg,
Jeffery A. Foran,
Charles J. Gauntt,
Charles P. Gerba,
Charles N. Haas,
Anita K. Highsmith,
Robert Irbe,
Päivi Julkunen,
Dennis D. Juranek,
Mark W. LeChevallier,
Myron M. Levine,
Bruce A. Macler,
Patricia A. Murphy,
Pierre Payment,
Fred Pfaender,
Stig Regli,
Alan Roberson,
Joan B. Rose,
Stephen A. Schaub,
Gilbert M. Schiff,
Jennifer Seed,
Charlotte Smith,
Mark D. Sobsey,
Robert C. Spear,
Isabel Walls
Publication year - 1996
Publication title -
risk analysis
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.972
H-Index - 130
eISSN - 1539-6924
pISSN - 0272-4332
DOI - 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1996.tb00835.x
Subject(s) - risk analysis (engineering) , risk assessment , conceptual framework , disease , environmental health , computer science , business , medicine , computer security , epistemology , pathology , philosophy
Currently, risk assessments of the potential human health effects associated with exposure to pathogens are utilizing the conceptual framework that was developed to assess risks associated with chemical exposures. However, the applicability of the chemical framework is problematic due to many issues that are unique to assessing risks associated with pathogens. These include, but are not limited to, an assessment of pathogen/host interactions, consideration of secondary spread, consideration of short‐ and long‐term immunity, and an assessment of conditions that allow the microorganism to propagate. To address this concern, a working group was convened to develop a conceptual framework to assess the risks of human disease associated with exposure to pathogenic microorganisms. The framework that was developed consists of three phases: problem formulation, analysis (which includes characterization of exposure and human health effects), and risk characterization. The framework emphasizes the dynamic and iterative nature of the risk assessment process, and allows wide latitude for planning and conducting risk assessments in diverse situations, each based on the common principles discussed in the framework.