"extent of hazard" is correct and usable in written English.
You can use it to refer to the degree of risk associated with a certain situation. For example: "The extent of hazard associated with the experiment was high, so safety precautions needed to be taken."
Changing the extent of hazard zones over time could become a difficulty due to version control of associated hazard maps.
Findings in this study will enable engineers to establish the extent of hazard zones due to wave overtopping behind coastal structures.
We also found that the extent of hazard area due to wave overtopping is significantly reduced by using a permeable structure crown.
The spatial extent of hazard zones (labelled X and Y in Figure 3) can be pre-determined with end-users; the inclusion or exclusion of infrastructure and communities in zones incorporates an element of risk.
Background information is mainly a database that contains the vector spatial extent of hazard-affected elements in areas of high vulnerability and risk with their essential attributes for damage assessment.
A difficulty with using a hazard-based system that was identified by the researchers includes the possibility for confusion with the spatial extent of hazards in hazard maps.
Depending on the definition of 'hazard' used, the levels could be determined according to likelihood (such as the hazard-based system in Figure 3) or spatial extent of hazards (as in the multi-foundation example in Figure 3).
In the eruption levels of the multi-foundation system the hazard is defined according to the spatial extent of hazardous areas (similar to a hazard map), which could be determined using a fixed likelihood.
The risk management approach used should be flexible enough for decision making to incorporate changing or new data on the nature and extent of the hazard, and how this affects risk (Quality Planning 2013) Uncertainty Use of the precautionary approach in situations where there is uncertainty surrounding risk is considered best practice (Quality Planning 2013; Saunders et al. 2013).
For patients with stage III disease extent of lymphadenectomy (hazard ratio 0.249, 95% CI −0.517 1.015, P=0.0001) and stage of disease (hazard ratio 2.203, 95% CI 1.819 2.587, P=0.0001) were significantly and independently associated with duration of survival.
So numerous have been the accounts of their effects, it is obvious not merely they are hazardous but that the nature and extent of their hazard has not always been fully appreciated.
