Comparison of exposure assessment methods for occupational carcinogens in a multi-centre lung cancer case-control study
Comparison of exposure assessment methods for occupational carcinogens in a multi-centre lung cancer case-control study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1136/oem.2010.055608
复制
发表时间：
2011-02-01
影响因子：
4.9
通讯作者：
Kromhout, Hans
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Peters, Susan;Vermeulen, Roel;Kromhout, Hans
Objectives Retrospective exposure assessment remains a problematic aspect of population-based case-control studies. Different methods have been developed, including case-by-case expert assessment and job-exposure matrices (JEM). The present analyses compare exposure prevalence and risk estimates derived by different exposure assessment methods.Methods In the context of a case-control study conducted in seven European countries, exposure was estimated for asbestos, diesel motor emissions (DME) and crystalline silica, using three different assessment methods. First, experts assigned exposures to all reported jobs on a case-by-case basis. Second, a population-specific JEM (PSJEM) was developed using the expert assessments of controls only, and re-applied to all study subjects. Third, an independent general population JEM (GPJEM) was created by occupational exposure experts not involved in the original study, and applied to study subjects.Results from these methods were compared. Results There was poor to fair agreement in assigned exposure between expert assessment and the GPJEM (kappas: asbestos 0.17; DME 0.48; silica 0.38). Exposure prevalence was significantly heterogeneous (p
