...
首页> 外文期刊>Occupational and environmental medicine >Is farm-related job title an adequate surrogate for pesticide exposure in occupational cancer epidemiology?
【24h】

Is farm-related job title an adequate surrogate for pesticide exposure in occupational cancer epidemiology?

机译:在职业癌症流行病学中,与农场相关的工作头衔是否足以代替农药?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

OBJECTIVES: Accurate assessment of exposure is a key factor in occupational epidemiology but can be problematic, particularly where exposures of interest may be many decades removed from relevant health outcomes. Studies have traditionally relied on crude surrogates of exposure based on job title only, for instance farm-related job title as a surrogate for pesticide exposure. METHODS: This analysis was based on data collected in Western Australia in 2000-2001. Using a multivariate regression model, we compared expert-assessed likelihood of pesticide exposure based on detailed, individual-specific questionnaire and job specific module interview information with reported farm-related job titles as a surrogate for pesticide exposure. RESULTS: Most (68.8%) jobs with likely pesticide exposure were farm jobs, but 78.3% of farm jobs were assessed as having no likelihood of pesticide exposure. Likely pesticide exposure was more frequent among jobs on crop farms than on livestock farms. Likely pesticide exposure was also more frequent among jobs commenced in more recent decades and jobs of longer duration. Our results suggest that very little misclassification would have resulted from the inverse assumption that all non-farming jobs are not pesticide exposed since only a very small fraction of non-agricultural jobs were likely to have had pesticide exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Classification of all farm jobs as pesticide exposed is likely to substantially over-estimate the number of individuals exposed. Our results also suggest that researchers should pay special attention to farm type, length of service and historical period of employment when assessing the likelihood of pesticide exposure in farming jobs.
机译:目的:对暴露的准确评估是职业流行病学中的关键因素,但可能会出现问题,尤其是在可能从相关健康结果中去除数十年的目标暴露的情况下。传统上,研究仅依赖于职务的粗略替代品替代,例如与农场相关的职务作为农药暴露的替代品。方法:该分析基于2000-2001年在西澳大利亚州收集的数据。使用多元回归模型,我们比较了基于详细的,针对特定个体的问卷调查和针对特定工作模块的访谈信息与报告的与农场相关的职称的专家评估的农药暴露可能性,以作为农药暴露的替代指标。结果:大多数(68.8%)可能接触农药的工作是农业工作,但据评估,有78.3%的农业工作没有接触农药的可能性。在农作物农场工作的农药暴露可能比在畜牧农场的农药暴露更为频繁。在最近几十年开始的工作和持续时间较长的工作中,农药接触的可能性也更高。我们的结果表明,由于所有非农业工作都没有接触农药的相反假设,几乎不会造成分类错误,因为只有极少数的非农业工作可能接触了农药。结论:将所有农场工作分类为接触农药很可能大大高估了接触农药的人数。我们的结果还表明,研究人员在评估农业工作中接触农药的可能性时,应特别注意农场的类型,服务时间和工作的历史时期。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号