ABSTRACT
Sea-level rise and associated flood hazards pose severe risks to the millions of people globally living in coastal zones. Models representing coastal adaptation and impacts are important tools to inform the design of strategies to manage these risks. Representing the often deep uncertainties influencing these risks poses nontrivial challenges. A common uncertainty characterization approach is to use a few benchmark cases to represent the range and relative probabilities of the set of possible outcomes. This has been done in coastal adaptation studies, for example, by using low, moderate, and high percentiles of an input of interest, like sea-level changes. A key consideration is how this simplified characterization of uncertainty influences the distributions of estimated coastal impacts. Here, we show that using only a few benchmark percentiles to represent uncertainty in future sea-level change can lead to overconfident projections and underestimate high-end risks as compared to using full ensembles for sea-level change and socioeconomic parametric uncertainties. When uncertainty in future sea level is characterized by low, moderate, and high percentiles of global mean sea-level rise, estimates of high-end (95th percentile) damages are underestimated by between 18% (SSP1-2.6) and 46% (SSP5-8.5). Additionally, using the 5th and 95th percentiles of sea-level scenarios underestimates the 5%-95% width of the distribution of adaptation costs by a factor ranging from about two to four, depending on SSP-RCP pathway. The resulting underestimation of the uncertainty range in adaptation costs can bias adaptation and mitigation decision-making.
ABSTRACT
The diagnostic value of core needle biopsy is increasingly being preferred because of its better characterization of benign and malignant lesions and lower frequency of insufficient samples. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy and complication rates with 2 different gauges of core biopsy needle in the preoperative diagnosis of palpable breast lumps. A total of 150 consecutive core biopsies were included in this prospective non-randomised study of palpable breast lump from May 2000 to May 2001. The tissue diagnosis made from the core biopsy specimen was compared with the final histopathology reports from the excised specimen. However, if the lump is not excised, a presumptive diagnosis of benign lesion was made only after at least 6 months follow up with no change in the breast lump. The data were analysed for sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, diagnostic accuracy and complications. The results from the 2 different sizes of core needle biopsies were compared accordingly and a statistical analysis was performed using Chi-squared test. Ninety-six core specimens were acquired with 14 G needle while the other 54 with 16 G needle. There was no significant statistical difference between the accuracy of both needle sizes. However, 4 complications occurred with the larger size 14 G needle while none with the 16 G needle, but this was not statistically significant. In conclusion the size 16 G core biopsy needle provided an accurate diagnostic reliability that is comparable to the larger size 14 G needle in the preoperative diagnosis of palpable breast lump.
