Final Program - Society for Risk Analysis

More documents

Recommendations

Info

...Back by Popular Demand...Back by Popular Demand...Back by Popular Demand...SRA Career FairCareer Fair, Tuesday, 5:00-6:30 pm - Ballroom FoyerFinding the right job. Continuing education. Work-force training. Career advancement. It’s a giant puzzle, but the career fairat this year’s SRA Annual Meeting can help you put all the pieces together. During this event, job seekers can network with employerslooking to fill vacancies as well as participate in on-site interviews. This will be your opportunity to show off your firstimpressions, resumes and get one-on-one time with local recruiters and employment resources.Come dressed professionally, and bring along plenty of résumés and a winning attitude. Remember, this is an employer’s firstimpression of you, so treat this event like you would a job interview.If you are a Student or Young Professional, join us for the Mixer while doing some networking at the Career Fair!Sponsors:ExponentUS Army Engineer Research and Development CenterParticipants:ARCADISRANDToxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment (TERA)US EPAUS FDA, Office of Planning, Office of Commissioner8
Workshops - Sunday, December 4Full Day Workshops8:30 am – 5:30 pm(Lunch is on your own, 12:30-1:30 pm)WK1: Benchmark Dose Modeling (BMD) Analysis – An Introductionto BMD Methods and Application of EPA’s Benchmark Dose SoftwareOrganizer: J. Allen Davis$350 onsite registrationThis workshop will provide participants with interactive training on theuse of the U.S. EPA’s Benchmark Dose Software (BMDS) and its applicationto risk assessment. The course will provide an overview of the BMD process,including determination of data adequacy, model fitting and comparison, andselection of a benchmark response level. This workshop will cover all BMDmodels available in BMDS 2.2 —including the new MS-COMBO model,which calculates multi-tumor composite risk values. Instruction will also begiven in regard to new features that have been implemented in version 2.2.This interactive training workshop will consist of morning and afternoon sessions.The morning session will include instructor presentations covering thebasic science and theory of BMD modeling, and is intended for those with noprior experience in BMD modeling. The afternoon session will expand uponthe morning session and will consist of a demonstration of EPA’s BMDS 2.2through individual and group class modeling exercises. Questions and criticaldiscussions of presentation material and class activities are highly encouraged.Participants planning to attend the afternoon session need to bring their ownlaptops to the workshop with BMDS 2.2 installed (with necessary administrativerights). The latest version of the software can be found at: http://epa.gov/ncea/bmds/.WK2: Advancing Mechanisms of Gut Interactions Informing MicrobialRisk AssessmentOrganizer: Peg Coleman$350 onsite registrationIn the decade since the first SRA workshop on mechanistic modelingof host-pathogen interactions in the gastrointestinal tract, a paradigm shiftarose that complicates microbial dose-response assessment for enteric patho-gens: expansion of knowledge of the gut ecosystem to include not just humanmucosal cells, but the indigenous microbiota and its collective genome, themicrobiome. The goal of the workshop is to promote a paradigm shift toan ecosystem approach for microbial risk assessment that incorporates dataon human microbiome interactions linked to stable pathways (health) or perturbedsystems (disease). International experts will introduce new conceptsand supporting evidence from metagenomic studies using high throughputsequencing methods rather than pure culture methods of past generations ofmedical microbiologists. Microbial risk analysts will be challenged to identifynot just the two traditional metrics (pathogen dose and host response)as in simple empirical dose-response models of disease outcomes, but alsothe underlying interactions of the complex gut ecosystems that cause healthand disease. Participants will consider how to scale data across spatial scales(genetic, molecular, tissue, organ, individual, subpopulation, population) formore coherent microbial dose-response assessment that incorporates innateand adaptive immune interactions of healthy ecosystems and immunomodulationby the microbiota in health and disease.WK3: Risk, Robustness and Info-GapsOrganizer: Yakov Ben-Haim$375 onsite registrationRisk analysts use measurements and science-based models to design systems,evaluate reliability, and make plans and policies. However, models maybe simpler than reality, causal factors may be unknown, measurements mayerr or be incomplete, and systems may change over time in unknown ways.Probability is useful for modeling and managing some of these uncertainties.However some uncertainties are info-gaps: disparities between what is knownand what needs to be known in order to make good decisions. For instance,we sometimes do not know the correct probability distribution or all of therelevant physical mechanisms such as non-linearities or time dependencies.This course studies info-gap theory for modeling and managing uncertaintiesin risk analysis and related decision problems. The course emphasizes theadded value of an info-gap analysis as well as its limitations, and the integrationof info-gap theory with probabilistic analysis. This course is built aroundlectures presenting a series of simple examples taken from a wide range ofapplications in the field of risk analysis, reliability assessment and policy selection.The examples illustrate the integration of info-gap robustness analysis ina variety of other decision strategies. The end of the workshop is devoted to9
Page 4 and 5: Ballroom C1Monday10:30 AM-NoonM2-A
Page 9: US Environmental Protection Agency
Page 13 and 14: WK9: Eliciting Judgments to Inform
Page 15 and 16: These freely available tools apply
Page 17 and 18: Plenary SessionsAll Plenary Session
Page 19 and 20: 10:30 AM-NoonRoom 8/9M2-F Panel Dis
Page 21 and 22: 1:30-3:00 PMRoom 8/9M3-F Symposium:
Page 23 and 24: 4:50 pm M4-E.5Modeling of landscape
Page 25 and 26: P.35 Health risk assessment of meta
Page 27 and 28: Works-In-ProgressP.99 Assessing the
Page 29 and 30: 10:30 AM-NoonRoom 8/9T2-F Error in
Page 31 and 32: 1:30-3:00 PMRoom 8/9T3-F AppliedMet
Page 34 and 35: 8:30-10:00 AMBallroom C1W1-A Sympos
Page 36 and 37: 10:30 AM-NoonBallroom C1W2-A Commun
Page 38: 1:30-3:00 PMBallroom C1W3-A Communi
Page 41 and 42: 3:30-4:30 PMRoom 8/9W4-F Environmen
Page 43 and 44: oth recent advances, and ongoing ch
Page 45 and 46: M3-H Symposium: Analyzing and Manag
Page 47 and 48: Part 2, we consider the use of expe
Page 49 and 50: T4-E Symposium: Food Safety Risk Pr
Page 51 and 52: While integral to guiding the devel
Page 53 and 54: have contributed to past difficulti
Page 55 and 56: M2-C.1 Abraham IM, Henry S; abraham
Page 58 and 59: serious accident of the Tokyo Elect
Page 60 and 61:
een found that independence assumpt
Page 62 and 63:
W4-I.1 Beach RH, McCarl BA, Ohrel S
Page 64 and 65:
M4-A.1 Berube DM; dmberube@ncsu.edu
Page 66 and 67:
W4-A.1 Boerner FU, Jardine C, Dried
Page 69 and 70:
M2-G.1 Brink SA, Davidson RA; rdavi
Page 71 and 72:
M4-H.5 Buede DM, Ezell BC, Guikema
Page 73 and 74:
same scientists’ environmental he
Page 75 and 76:
periods of time. Successful adaptat
Page 77 and 78:
P.123 Charnley G, Melnikov F, Beck
Page 79 and 80:
derived from mouse and rat testes t
Page 81 and 82:
esources under any circumstance in
Page 83 and 84:
W4-B.3 Convertino M, Collier ZA, Va
Page 85 and 86:
addition, over 10% thought that eve
Page 87 and 88:
Reference Dose (RfD). The average e
Page 89 and 90:
W2-H.2 Demuth JL, Morss RE, Morrow
Page 91 and 92:
T4-H.4 Dingus CA, McMillan NJ, Born
Page 93 and 94:
methods research priorities and pot
Page 95 and 96:
W3-A.2 Eggers SL, Thorne SL, Sousa
Page 97 and 98:
tions) were < 1 for sub-populations
Page 99 and 100:
sociated with model error. Second,
Page 101 and 102:
inter-donation interval to mitigate
Page 103 and 104:
Fukushima nuclear accident coverage
Page 105 and 106:
for growth inhibitor use and retail
Page 107 and 108:
W1-C.1 Goble R, Hattis D; rgoble@cl
Page 109 and 110:
stakeholders. The utility of this m
Page 111 and 112:
T2-E.4 Guidotti TL; tee.guidotti@gm
Page 113 and 114:
M4-C.2 Haines DA, Murray JL, Donald
Page 115 and 116:
providing normative information of
Page 117 and 118:
then allow both systems to operate
Page 119 and 120:
tious disease outbreaks. Several cl
Page 121 and 122:
P.122 Hosseinali Mirza V, de Marcel
Page 123 and 124:
W2-B.1 Isukapalli SS, Brinkerhoff C
Page 125 and 126:
M3-G.3 Jardine CG, Driedger SM, Fur
Page 127 and 128:
P.88 Johnson BB, Cuite C, Hallman W
Page 129 and 130:
metrics to provide risk management
Page 131 and 132:
M4-C.1 Koch HM, Angerer J; koch@ipa
Page 133 and 134:
certainty factors) and comparative
Page 135 and 136:
T3-D.4 LaRocca S, Guikema SD, Cole
Page 137 and 138:
P.71 Lemus-Martinez C, Lemyre L, Pi
Page 139 and 140:
of excretion, and the increased che
Page 141 and 142:
M2-D.4 MacKenzie CA, Barker K; cmac
Page 143 and 144:
isk appetite and optimal risk mitig
Page 145 and 146:
ameters, and enabled a more robust
Page 147 and 148:
over the nature and format of infor
Page 149 and 150:
Analysis (PRA). Existing parametric
Page 151 and 152:
explosion of a bomb in a building,
Page 153 and 154:
T3-G.3 Nascarella MA; mnascarella@g
Page 155 and 156:
corresponding slowdown in container
Page 157 and 158:
ing the scope and usage of the cybe
Page 159 and 160:
dose for a variety of exposure scen
Page 161 and 162:
“nanofibers”) is relatively und
Page 163 and 164:
ment (CEA), which provides both a f
Page 165 and 166:
T3-D.2 Resurreccion JZ, Santos JR;
Page 167 and 168:
shore wind turbines have yet been b
Page 169 and 170:
T2-D.3 Rypinski AD, Cantral R; Arth
Page 171 and 172:
time and temperature, determining t
Page 173 and 174:
esponse to requests from the EC, th
Page 175 and 176:
ers and inspectors. Analysis examin
Page 177 and 178:
smoked salmon, and associated expos
Page 179 and 180:
and 95th percentiles). Increasing t
Page 181 and 182:
esponse relationship for B. anthrac
Page 183 and 184:
variation on Day 0. Results showed
Page 185 and 186:
sidered. The most significant resul
Page 187 and 188:
lived in a apartment (not including
Page 189 and 190:
W3-C.4 von Stackelberg KE; kvon@eri
Page 191 and 192:
P.12 Waller RR, Dinis MF; rw@protec
Page 193 and 194:
W2-B.6 Wang D, Collier Z, Mitchell-
Page 195 and 196:
iomonitoring “equivalent” level
Page 197 and 198:
T4-H.2 Winkel D, Good K, VonNiederh
Page 199 and 200:
mation insufficiency, risk percepti
Page 201 and 202:
choices. This work examines these s
Page 203 and 204:
sults and possible intended or unin
Page 205 and 206:
AAbadin HG.................... 36,
Page 207 and 208:
Gray GM............................
Page 209 and 210:
Peters E...........................
Page 211 and 212:
SECOND FLOOR Floor MapConvention Ce
show all

Final Program - Society for Risk Analysis

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?