Identification and Review of Sensitivity Analysis Methods
Abstract
Identification and qualitative comparison of sensitivity analysis methods that have been used across various disciplines, and that merit consideration for application to food‐safety risk assessment models, are presented in this article. Sensitivity analysis can help in identifying critical control points, prioritizing additional data collection or research, and verifying and validating a model. Ten sensitivity analysis methods, including four mathematical methods, five statistical methods, and one graphical method, are identified. The selected methods are compared on the basis of their applicability to different types of models, computational issues such as initial data requirement and complexity of their application, representation of the sensitivity, and the specific uses of these methods. Applications of these methods are illustrated with examples from various fields. No one method is clearly best for food‐safety risk models. In general, use of two or more methods, preferably with dissimilar theoretical foundations, may be needed to increase confidence in the ranking of key inputs.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Sensitivity analysis has become instrumental in the systems pharmacology arena to guide the understanding and development of a complex model.
“it has become instrumental in the systems pharmacology arena to guide the understanding and development of a complex model.25, 26, 27”
From Sobol Sensitivity Analysis: A Tool to Guide the Development and Evaluation of Systems Pharmacology Models (2015) · cites this paper as [27]
Cites
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-3338 · Cited by 35,305 · see citing works
A Quantitative Model-Independent Method for Global Sensitivity Analysis of Model Output
Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., & Chan, K. P.-S. (1999) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1999.10485594 · Cited by 2,275 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Characterising performance of environmental models
Bennett, N. D., Croke, B. F. W., Guariso, G., Guillaume, J. H. A., Hamilton, S. H., Jakeman, A. J., Marsili-Libelli, S., Newham, L. T. H., Norton, J. P., Perrin, C., et al. (2013) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.09.011 · Cited by 1,536 · see citing works
Understanding the dominant controls on litter decomposition
Bradford, M. A., Berg, B., Maynard, D. S., Wieder, W. R., & Wood, S. A. (2016) · Journal of Ecology · doi:10.1111/1365-2745.12507 · Cited by 669 · see citing works
Zhang, X., Trame, M., Lesko, L., & Schmidt, S. (2015) · CPT: Pharmacometrics & Systems Pharmacology · doi:10.1002/psp4.6 · Cited by 467 · see citing works
“6–10) and nine parameters, with the initial condition for T compartment (1,000 mm(23)), Virus HIV population V compartment (10(23) mm(23)), T* (0) and T** compartment (0), respectively.(27,41)”
BackgroundComparative study of parameter sensitivity analyses of the TCR-activated Erk-MAPK signalling pathway
Zheng, Y., & Rundell, A. (2006) · IEE Proceedings - Systems Biology · doi:10.1049/ip-syb:20050088 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Cedersund, G. (2012) · The FEBS Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1742-4658.2012.08725.x · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Jaxa-Rozen, M., & Kwakkel, J. (2018) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.06.011 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
A Prediction Model for Battery Electric Bus Energy Consumption in Transit
Abdelaty, H., & Mohamed, M. (2021) · Energies · doi:10.3390/en14102824 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Mokhtari, A., & Frey, H. C. (2005) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00679.x · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Basic Framework and Main Methods of Uncertainty Quantification
Zhang, J., Yin, J., & Wang, R. (2020) · Mathematical Problems in Engineering · doi:10.1155/2020/6068203 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
An analytical framework to assist decision makers in the use of forest ecosystem model predictions
Larocque, G. R., Bhatti, J. S., Ascough, J. C., Liu, J., Luckai, N., Mailly, D., Archambault, L., & Gordon, A. M. (2011) · Environmental Modelling & Software · doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2010.03.009 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
- Authors
- Christopher Frey, H., & Patil, S. R.
- ORCID
- Patil, Sumeet R.
- Venue
- Risk Analysis
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-06
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 553-578
- ISSN
- 0272-4332 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-6924
- OpenAlex
- W2138766682
- Cited by
- 1,036
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 60 · 2025: 84 · 2024: 96 · 2023: 92 · 2022: 64 · 2021: 48 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 50 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 47 · 2014: 50 · 2013: 40 · 2012: 35
- FWCI
- 15.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Risk Analysis (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Probabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Risk and Safety Analysis
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Safety and Hygiene
- Keywords
- sensitivity analysis, food safety risk assessment, risk assessment model, model validation, model verification, critical control points
- MeSH terms
- Analysis of Variance, Food Contamination, Fourier Analysis, Regression Analysis, Safety, Sensitivity and Specificity, United States, Models, Statistical, Risk Assessment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
