Exposure assessment in epidemiology: Does gender matter?
Exposure assessment in epidemiology: Does gender matter?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/ajim.10297
复制
发表时间：
2003-12-01
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
Koehoorn, M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kennedy, SM;Koehoorn, M
背景 从工作环境中的潜在危害到流行病学研究的个人暴露测量或估计的途径包括许多步骤，每个步骤都可能受到可能或可能不因性别而异的因素的影响。本文探讨了这一途径以解决“在流行病学研究的暴露评估活动中是否应该考虑性别差异的可能性？”的问题。 旨在探讨在实际研究中是否发现了暴露评估中性别“偏见”的几个理论来源。所检查的偏见来源包括：尽管职位相同，但工作任务存在差异；由于防护设备、身体尺寸或与暴露源的其他关系的差异而导致的暴露暴露差异；以及因研究方法或设计而产生的估计暴露量的差异。结果和结论至少在一些研究中，从所有这些来源中发现了性别差异（以及潜在的偏见）的证据。我们得出的结论是，该问题的答案是“性别在流行病学暴露评估中重要吗？”是一个合格的“是”，但潜在偏差的大小和方向无法先验地预测。
Background The pathway from potential hazards in the work environment to the measurement or estimation of personal exposure for epidemiologic studies comprises many steps, each of which can be influenced by factors that may or may not differ by gender This article explores this pathway to address the question, "Should the potential for gender differences be taken into account in the activity of exposure assessment for epidemiologic studies?"Methods Evidence from previously published studies and data from the investigators' own research were examined to explore whether or not several theoretical sources of gender 'bias' in exposure assessment have been found in actual studies. Sources of bias examined included: differences in job tasks despite same job titles; differences in delivered exposure due to differences in protective equipment, body size, or other relationships to exposure sources; and differences in estimated exposure arising from study methods or design.Results and Conclusions Evidence was found for gender differences (and thus potential bias) from all these sources, at least in some studies. We conclude that the answer to the question posed, "Does gender matter in exposure assessment for epidemiology?" is a qualified 'yes,' but that the magnitude and direction of the potential bias cannot be predicted, a priori.