What Should We Do with Short-Term Jobs in Studies of Chronic Diseases?
What Should We Do with Short-Term Jobs in Studies of Chronic Diseases?
复制标题
慢性病研究的短期工作我们应该怎么办?
DOI:
10.1093/annweh/wxz041
复制
发表时间:
2019
影响因子:
2.6
通讯作者:
Friesen,MelissaC
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Friesen,MelissaC
In population-based studies of chronic diseases, lifetime occupation information is typically obtained directly from study participants. It is common practice to exclude collection of information on jobs held< 12 months to ease respondent burden because these are more difficult to recall as they often were held early in subjects’ working lives. In this issue, the impact of jobs held for a slightly longer—> 1 year, but< 2 years (herein,“shortterm jobs”)—was evaluated by Parent et al.(2019). They found that short-term jobs comprised 19% of all jobs but, on average, contributed< 4% of subjects’ work years. They concluded that this resulted in a large burden on expert job-by-job review to code jobs and assess exposure, with a likely marginal impact on lifetime exposure assessment. However, they also noted, based on a limited exposure assessment, that short-term jobs were more often exposed to fumes, odors, dust, poor ventilation, outdoor work, and heavy physical activity than jobs held≥ 2 years.For this commentary, a similar evaluation was performed using data from an occupational lead exposure assessment conducted within a case–control study of kidney cancer using a short-term definition of jobs held≥ 6 months and< 2 years (Callahan et al. 2018). Similar to Parent et al., these jobs comprised 19% of the 11 958 jobs. At least one short-term job was held by 49% of the 2408 subjects; for these subjects, short-term jobs comprised a median of 8% of their employed person-years (interquartile range: 4.7–15%). However, short-term jobs contributed> 50 and 100% of a subject’s employed person-years for 47 and 27 subjects, respectively. Less