Identification of determinants of exposure: Consequences for measurement and control strategies

Occupational and Environmental Medicine

Volumn 62, Issue 5, 2005, Pages

  Burdorf, A ^a  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ASPHALT; POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBON;

AIR CONDITIONING; DUST; EXHAUST GAS; INDUSTRIAL WORKER; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE; OCCUPATIONAL HAZARD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; WORKPLACE;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ENVIRONMENT DESIGN; HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE; OCCUPATIONS; WORKPLACE;

EID: 17844365536     PISSN: 13510711     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/oem.2004.015198     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. Nieuwenhuijsen MJ, ed. Exposure assessment in occupational and environmental epidemiology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. ▶ This book is the latest comprehensive review of basic principles of exposure assessment and its application in occupational and environmental epidemiological studies. It contains mony methodological and practical problems with clear guidance for researchers and practitioners.
2. Burdorf A, Lillienberg L, Brisman J. Characterization of exposure to flour dust in Swedish bakeries. Ann Occup Hyg 1994;38:67-78.
3. Rappoport SM. Assessment of long-term exposures to toxic substances in air. Ann Occup Hyg 1991;35:61-121. ▶ Excellent review addressing oll essential aspects of exposure assessment strategies with detailed guidance as to statistical analysis and interpretation. This paper greatly facilitated the use of statistical procedures to estimate the magnitude of exposure variability.
4. Kromhout H, Symanski E, Rappaport SM. A comprehensive evaluation of within- and between-worker components of occupational exposure to chemical agents. Ann Occup Hyg 1993;37:253-70. ▶ Comprehensive evaluation of temporal and personal variability in exposure with essential information on statistical methods applied to assess within- and between-worker variance components and numerous details on exposure variability in various occupational groups.
5. Kromhout H, Loomis DP, Mihlan GJ, et al. Assessment and grouping of occupational magnetic field exposure in five electric utility companies. Scand J Work Environ Health 1995;21:43-50.
6. Nieuwenhuijsen MJ, Gordon S, Harris JM, et al. Variation in rat urinary aeroallergen levels explained by differences in site, task and exposure group. Ann Occup Hyg 1995;39:819-25.
7. Burdorf A. Sources of variance in exposure to postural load on the back in occupational groups. Scand J Work Environ Health 1992;18:361-7.
8. Dement JM, Harris RL, Symons MJ, et al. Exposures and mortality among chrysotile asbestos workers. Part I: exposure estimates. Am J Ind Med 1983;4:399-419.
9. Burstyn I, Teschke K. Studying the determinants of exposure: a review of methods. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 1999;60:57-72. ▶ Extensive review on different types of exposure studies, with emphasis on issues in measurement design and data analysis of exposure determinants, such os source oriented ond task specific sampling, correlation of determinants, empirical model building, and interpretation of statistical results.
10. Peretz C, Goren A, Smid T, et al. Application of mixed-effects models for exposure assessment. Ann Occup Hyg 2002;46:69-77.
11. Littell RC, Pendergrass J, Natarajan R. Tutorial in biostatistics. Modelling covariance structure in the analysis of repeated measures data. Stat Med 2000;19:1793-819. ▶ A good overview of statistical issues of application of mixed models, describing the rich selection of covariance structures from which to choose, the effects of particular covarionce structures on tests of fixed effects in a mixed model, ond ample examples of SAS procedures for different model definitions.
12. Burstyn I, Kromhout H, Kauppinen T, et al. Statistical modelling of the determinants of historical exposure to bitumen and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons among paving workers. Ann Occup Hyg 2000;44:43-56.
13. Burstyn I, Boffetta P, Burr GA, et al. Validity of empirical models of exposure in asphalt paving. Occup Environ Med 2002;59:620-4.
14. Rappoport SM, Weaver M, Taylor D, et al. Application of mixed models to assess exposures monitored by construction workers during hot processes. Ann Occup Hyg 1999;43:457-69. ▶ One of the first popers with a detailed statistical background of the mixed effects model with different assumptions about the underlying variance structure. The application in the construction industry presents an excellent format for anyone interested in addressing the magnitude, variability, and sources of exposure.
15. Armstrong BG. Effect of measurement error on epidemiological studies of environmental and occupational exposures. Occup Environ Med 1998;55:651-6. ▶ Solid introduction into the effects of measurement error in exposure on the results of an epidemiolagical study and ways how to reduce these effects in designing studies.
16. Tielemans E, Kupper LL, Kromhout H, et al. Individual-based and group-based occupational exposure assessment: some equations to evaluate different strategies. Ann Occup Hyg 1998;42:115-19. ▶ Mathematical approach to consequences of choosing an individual or group based approach in the exposure assessment strategy with equations ta evaluate different options.
17. Van Tongeren MJ, Kromhout H, Gardiner K, et al. Assessment of the sensitivity of the relation between current exposure to carbon black and lung function parameters when using different grouping schemes. Am J Ind Med 1999;36:548-56. ▶ For readers who are o little deterred by mathematical expressions, this paper shows the profound consequences of different grouping schemes on slope ond standard error of the regression coefficients for the exposure-response relations between corbon block and lung function FVC and FEV1.
18. Lemasters GK, Shukla R, Li YD, et al. Balancing cost and precision in exposure assessment studies. J Occup Environ Med 1996;38:39-45. ▶ Guidance in different design options of a measurement strategy with sources of exposure variability linked to strategies to reduce variability ond to minimise costs.
19. Rappoport SM, Lyles RH, Kupper LL. An exposure-assessments strategy accounting for within- and between-worker sources of variability. Ann Occup Hyg 1995;39:469-95. ▶ Interesting example of on assessment strategy combining compliance testing with control strategies, using insight into variance components.
20. Park D, Teschke K, Bartlett K. A modelror predicting endotoxin concentrations in metalworking fluid sumps in small machine shops. Ann Occup Hyg 2001;45:569-76.
21. Kromhout H. Design of measurement strategies for workplace exposures. Occup Environ Med 2002;59:349-54.