Clinical and Operational Risk: A Bayesian Approach

  • Chiara Cornalba


In health care organizations (HCOs) adverse events may provoke dangerous consequences on patients, such as death, a longer hospital stay, and morbidity. As a consequence, HCO’s department needs to manage legal issues and economic reimbursements. Governances and physicians are interested in operational (OR) and clinical risk (CR) assessment, mainly for forecasting and managing losses and for a correct decision making. Currently, scientific researches, which are objected to a quantification of CR and OR in HCO, are scarce; absence of regulatory constraints and limited awareness of benefits due to risk management do not provide incentives to elaborate on how risks can be quantified. This paper is aimed at proposing Bayesian methods to manage operational and clinical adverse events in health care. Bayesian Networks (BNs) are useful for assessing risks given end stage renal disease (ESRD) as a context of application; some prior probability distributions are advised for representing knowledge before experimental results and Bayesian utility functions for making the optimal decision. The method is described as from the theoretical as from the empirical point of view, thanks to the health care and haemodialysis department, for this application. The ultimate goal is to introduce a methodology useful for managing operational and clinical risk for haemodialysis patients and departments.


Bayesian Network Bayesian utility function Clinical risk Operational risk Prior probability distribution 

AMS 2000 Subject Classification

62C10 91B30 35B45 91B16 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. J. M. Bernardo, and A. F. M. Smith, Bayesian Theory, John Wiley and Sons: New York, 1994.MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. G. F. Cooper, and E. Herskovits, “A Bayesian method for the induction of probabilistic networks from data,” Machine Learning vol. 9 no. 4 pp. 309–347, Oct. 1992.Google Scholar
  3. C. Cornalba, Risk Management Models in Health Care: Methods and Applications for the Assessment of Clinical and Operational Risk, University of Pavia, PhD Dissertation, 2006.Google Scholar
  4. DOQI Group, “K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines for bone metabolism and disease in chronic kidney disease,” American Journal of Kidney Disease vol. 42 no. 3 pp. 1–201, 2003.Google Scholar
  5. ESRD Group, ESRD Glossary, Medicare ESRD Network Organizations, 2006.Google Scholar
  6. FDA Administration, Guidance for the Use of Bayesian Statistics in Medical Device Clinical Trials. Technical report, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Division of Biostatistics, 2006.Google Scholar
  7. A. Frachot, O. Moudoulaud, T. Roncalli, Loss Distribution Approach in Practice. Technical report, Groupe de Recherche Opèrationnelle, Crèdit Lyonnais, France, 2003.Google Scholar
  8. T. B. Fomby, and R. Carter Hill, Applying Maximum Entropy to Econometric Problems, JAI Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  9. W. T. Grandy, and L. H. Schick, Maximum Entropy and Bayesian Methods. Kluwer, Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, 1999.Google Scholar
  10. Institute IOM, “To err is human. Building a safer health system.” In L. Kohn, J. Corrigan, and M. Donaldson (eds.), National Academy Press: Washington, Second edition, 1999.Google Scholar
  11. P. D. Grunwald, and A. P. Dawid, “Game theory, maximum entropy, minimum discrepancy, and robust Bayesian decision theory,” Annals of Statistics vol. 32 pp. 1367–1433, 2004.Google Scholar
  12. D. J. Hand, H. Mannila, P. Smyth, Principles of Data Mining (Adaptive Computation and Machine Learning), The MIT Press, 2001.Google Scholar
  13. E. T. Jaynes, Probability Theory: The Logic of Science. In L. Bretthorst (ed.), Cambridge University Press, 2003.Google Scholar
  14. F. V. Jensen, Bayesian Networks and Decision Graphs, Springer, First edition, 2001.Google Scholar
  15. J. Kim, R. L. Pisoni, M. Danese, S. Satayathum, P. Klassen, and E. W. Young, “Achievement of proposed NKF-K/DOQI bone metabolism and disease guidelines: results from the dialysis outcomes and practice patterns study (DOPPS),” Journal of the American Society of Nephrology vol. 14 no. 25 pp. 269–270, 2003.Google Scholar
  16. H. Kumamoto and E. J. Henley, Probabilistic Risk Assessment and Management for Engineers and Scientist, IEEE Press, Second edition, 1996.Google Scholar
  17. R. C. Lee and W. E. Wright, “Development of human exposure-factor distributions using maximum-entropy inference,” Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology vol. 4 pp. 329–341, 1994.Google Scholar
  18. L. Lorton, Risk Assessment and Management Guide for the Medical Practice, AMA Press, American Medical Association, 2005.Google Scholar
  19. J. Pearl, Aspects of Graphical Models Connected with Causality. Proceedings of 49th Session, International Statistical Institute: Invited papers, Florence, Italy, 1993.Google Scholar
  20. H. Raiffa, Decision Analysis: Introductory Readings on Choices Under Uncertainty, McGraw Hill, 1997.Google Scholar
  21. J. Shao, Mathematical Statistics, Springer, Second edition, 2003.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied Statistics and Economics (Libero Lenti)University of PaviaPaviaItaly

Personalised recommendations