1 / 13

Step 5: Identifying probable causes for the Truckee River case study

Step 5: Identifying probable causes for the Truckee River case study. Detect or Suspect Biological Impairment. Stressor Identification. Define the Case. List Candidate Causes. Decision-maker and Stakeholder Involvement. As Necessary: Acquire Data and Iterate Process.

dorothydunn
Download Presentation

Step 5: Identifying probable causes for the Truckee River case study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Step 5: Identifying probable causes for the Truckee River case study

  2. Detect or Suspect Biological Impairment Stressor Identification Define the Case List Candidate Causes Decision-maker and Stakeholder Involvement As Necessary: Acquire Data and Iterate Process Evaluate Data from the Case Evaluate Data from Elsewhere Step 5: Identify Probable Cause Identify and Apportion Sources Management Action: Eliminate or Control Sources, Monitor Results Biological Condition Restored or Protected

  3. Weighing the evidence for each candidate cause • Evaluate the quantity & quality of evidence • Evaluate consistency & credibility • Summarize the compelling evidence

  4. Things to keep in mind when scoring… • Be consistent across candidate causes • Don’t double-count data • Think about the quality & quantity of the data you’re using • Document your thought process

  5. R refutes D diagnoses +++ convincingly supports (or weakens - - -) ++ strongly supports (or weakens - -) + somewhat supports (or weakens - ) 0 neither supports nor weakens NE no evidence The scoring system

  6. Let’s start scoring each type of evidence, across each candidate cause…

  7. Evaluate quantity & quality of evidence • Quality & quantity of data influence scores • Now evaluate overall quality of evidence • Lots of consistent evidence reduces quality concerns for any 1 type of evidence • Poor quality data may be discounted • Consider study designs, methods, relevance, variability, & other QA issues

  8. Now that we’ve scored each type of evidence, let’s evaluate consistency & credibility

  9. Evaluate consistency & credibility • Prepare summary table of scores • Do not add up scores! • Evaluate consistency of evidence • Look for compelling evidence • If evidence is inconsistent, consider mechanistic explanations • e.g., lab data not consistent with field conditions due to differing bioavailability

  10. Scoring consistency & credibility

  11. Summarize compelling evidence • Make an overall evaluation of strength of evidence for each candidate cause • what evidence compels belief that candidate cause induced effect? • what evidence strongly casts doubt? • Consider the principle characteristics of causal relationships • these are what you’re trying to show • they summarize the 15 types of evidence

  12. What comes after causal analysis? • If confidence in results is low… • plan studies to obtain critical evidence • experimental studies most likely to be convincing • If confidence in results is high… • identify sources • take action • monitor results

  13. So – what’s next? • Additional data to collect? • Additional analyses to conduct? • Additional sites to consider? • Outreach & communication?

More Related