HOMEPRODUCTSCOMPANYCONTACTFAQResearchDictionaryPharmaSign Up FREE or Login

A comparison of exposure assessment approaches: lung cancer and occupational asbestos exposure in a population-based case-control study.

AbstractOBJECTIVES:
In attempts to overcome the limitations of self-reported data in occupational health research, job-exposure matrices, which assign exposure by occupation, have emerged as an objective approach for assessing occupational exposures. On the basis of a lung cancer case-control study conducted in the Greater Toronto Area, 1997-2002, assessment of occupational exposure to asbestos was compared using self-reports and a general population job-exposure matrix (DOM-JEM).
METHODS:
Cases and frequency matched controls provided life-time job histories and self-reported exposures to potential lung carcinogens including asbestos through a detailed questionnaire. Exposure to asbestos was also assigned to each job by linking occupational histories with DOM-JEM. Agreement in classification of exposed and unexposed jobs according to self-reports and DOM-JEM was evaluated using Cohen's κ. Risks for lung cancer were estimated using unconditional logistic regression for each exposure assessment approach.
RESULTS:
The prevalence of occupational asbestos exposure was greater when based on DOM-JEM than when based on self-reports. Agreement in classifying exposure to jobs between the two assessment approaches was poor. The risk of lung cancer was not elevated among workers who self-reported asbestos exposure, whereas workers considered exposed on the basis of DOM-JEM were almost twice as likely as unexposed workers to be diagnosed with lung cancer (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.7).
CONCLUSIONS:
It is generally assumed by epidemiologists that self-reported exposure assessments result in inflated risk estimates. In this study, self-reports found no association with a well-established risk factor, whereas a high-quality job-exposure matrix revealed relative risk estimates that are more consistent with previous findings.
AuthorsJill S Hardt, Roel Vermeulen, Susan Peters, Hans Kromhout, John R McLaughlin, Paul A Demers
JournalOccupational and environmental medicine (Occup Environ Med) Vol. 71 Issue 4 Pg. 282-8 (Apr 2014) ISSN: 1470-7926 [Electronic] England
PMID24334241 (Publication Type: Comparative Study, Journal Article)
Chemical References
  • Asbestos
Topics
  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Asbestos (adverse effects)
  • Case-Control Studies
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Logistic Models
  • Lung Neoplasms (chemically induced)
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Occupational Diseases (chemically induced)
  • Occupational Exposure (analysis, classification)
  • Prevalence
  • Risk Factors
  • Self Report

Join CureHunter, for free Research Interface BASIC access!

Take advantage of free CureHunter research engine access to explore the best drug and treatment options for any disease. Find out why thousands of doctors, pharma researchers and patient activists around the world use CureHunter every day.
Realize the full power of the drug-disease research graph!


Choose Username:
Email:
Password:
Verify Password:
Enter Code Shown: