Assessment of Lifetime Occupational Exposure in an Epidemiologic Study of COPD

M. Graziani, B. Doney, E. Hnizdo, J. Villnave, Victor Breen, S. Weinmann, W. Vollmer, M. McBurnie, A. Buist, M. Heumann
{"title":"Assessment of Lifetime Occupational Exposure in an Epidemiologic Study of COPD","authors":"M. Graziani, B. Doney, E. Hnizdo, J. Villnave, Victor Breen, S. Weinmann, W. Vollmer, M. McBurnie, A. Buist, M. Heumann","doi":"10.2174/1874297101205010027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ascertainment of lifetime occupational exposures in an epidemiological study of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is important in order to investigate its effect on the disease and develop prevention strategies. The aim of our paper is to describe and evaluate a methodology used to assign lifetime occupational exposure to participants in a case-control study of COPD where lifetime occupational history was ascertained through telephone questionnaire interviews. The methodology involved assigning to each individual a qualitative index of potential exposure to eight occupational hazards, summarized individually overall the job categories reported by the individual, and an overall qualitative index of lifetime exposure to all eight hazards. The eight occupational hazards scored were mineral dusts, metal dusts/fumes, organic dusts, irritant gases/vapors, sensitizers, organic solvents, diesel exhaust, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). Two industrial hygienists independently assigned the above indices based on: their expert opinion, a priori knowledge based on literature review, and study participants' responses to interviewer questions regarding types and duration of exposure. To evaluate agreement of the assigned scores, we used the Kappa statistic to test the agreement between the two scorers on each of the indices. The Kappa statistic generally indicated good agreement between the industrial hygienists' scores but varied by exposure from 0.42 to 0.86. Although the exposure scoring is somewhat subjective, it is based on experience of experts and review of the literature. This method, with subject interviews providing qualitative lifetime exposure data when air monitoring has not been conducted, is useful for reconstructing lifetime exposures.","PeriodicalId":87834,"journal":{"name":"The open epidemiology journal","volume":"5 1","pages":"27-35"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The open epidemiology journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874297101205010027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Ascertainment of lifetime occupational exposures in an epidemiological study of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is important in order to investigate its effect on the disease and develop prevention strategies. The aim of our paper is to describe and evaluate a methodology used to assign lifetime occupational exposure to participants in a case-control study of COPD where lifetime occupational history was ascertained through telephone questionnaire interviews. The methodology involved assigning to each individual a qualitative index of potential exposure to eight occupational hazards, summarized individually overall the job categories reported by the individual, and an overall qualitative index of lifetime exposure to all eight hazards. The eight occupational hazards scored were mineral dusts, metal dusts/fumes, organic dusts, irritant gases/vapors, sensitizers, organic solvents, diesel exhaust, and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). Two industrial hygienists independently assigned the above indices based on: their expert opinion, a priori knowledge based on literature review, and study participants' responses to interviewer questions regarding types and duration of exposure. To evaluate agreement of the assigned scores, we used the Kappa statistic to test the agreement between the two scorers on each of the indices. The Kappa statistic generally indicated good agreement between the industrial hygienists' scores but varied by exposure from 0.42 to 0.86. Although the exposure scoring is somewhat subjective, it is based on experience of experts and review of the literature. This method, with subject interviews providing qualitative lifetime exposure data when air monitoring has not been conducted, is useful for reconstructing lifetime exposures.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COPD流行病学研究中的终身职业暴露评估
在慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)流行病学研究中,确定终生职业暴露对于研究其对疾病的影响并制定预防策略具有重要意义。我们论文的目的是描述和评估一种方法,该方法用于分配COPD病例对照研究参与者的终身职业暴露,该研究通过电话问卷访谈确定终身职业史。该方法包括为每个人分配潜在暴露于八种职业危害的定性指数,个人总体总结个人报告的工作类别,以及终身暴露于所有八种危害的总体定性指数。被评分的八种职业危害是矿物粉尘、金属粉尘/烟雾、有机粉尘、刺激性气体/蒸汽、敏化剂、有机溶剂、柴油废气和环境烟草烟雾(ETS)。两名工业卫生学家根据以下因素独立分配上述指标:他们的专家意见,基于文献综述的先验知识,以及研究参与者对采访者关于暴露类型和持续时间的问题的回答。为了评估分配分数的一致性,我们使用Kappa统计来测试两个评分者在每个指标上的一致性。Kappa统计数据一般表明工业卫生学家的分数之间有良好的一致性,但因暴露而异,从0.42到0.86。虽然暴露评分有点主观,但它是基于专家的经验和文献综述。这种方法在没有进行空气监测的情况下,通过受试者访谈提供定性的终生暴露数据,有助于重建终生暴露。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Factors that Hindered Effective Containment of Coronavirus: A Nigerian Perspective The Effectiveness of Bioresonance Method on Human Health Evaluation of an Intervention to Reduce Tear Gas Exposures and Associated Acute Respiratory Illnesses in a US Army Basic Combat Training Cohort Childhood Cancer in the Republic of Suriname (1980 Through 2008) Bayesian and Frequentist Comparison for Epidemiologists: A NonMathematical Application on Logistic Regressions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1