Comparison of veterinary import risk analysis studies Online publication date: Sat, 28-Feb-2015
by Clazien J. De Vos; Larry G. Paisley; Franz J. Conraths; Amie Adkin; Gunilla S. Hallgren
International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management (IJRAM), Vol. 15, No. 4, 2011
Abstract: Twenty-two veterinary import risk analyses (IRAs) were audited: a) for inclusion of the main elements of risk analysis; b) between different types of IRAs; c) between reviewers' scores. No significant differences were detected between different types of IRAs, although quantitative IRAs and IRAs published in peer-reviewed journals tended to have higher scores than qualitative and report-published IRAs. Unexpectedly, no difference in scores was observed between IRAs that were classified as adhering to the OIE guidelines and those that did not. Reviewer bias was detected for the absolute scores given to the IRAs, although ranking of IRAs was reasonably consistent across reviewers. The audit spreadsheet should undergo further adaptation with a focus on hazard identification and risk assessment. We recommend that reviewing IRAs using the audit spreadsheet be done by a multidisciplinary group that comprises both specialists on risk assessment methodology and on the risk that is assessed.
Existing subscribers:
Go to Inderscience Online Journals to access the Full Text of this article.
If you are not a subscriber and you just want to read the full contents of this article, buy online access here.Complimentary Subscribers, Editors or Members of the Editorial Board of the International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management (IJRAM):
Login with your Inderscience username and password:
Want to subscribe?
A subscription gives you complete access to all articles in the current issue, as well as to all articles in the previous three years (where applicable). See our Orders page to subscribe.
If you still need assistance, please email subs@inderscience.com
Our Blog 
Follow us on Twitter 
Visit us on Facebook