ArticleJournal of occupational and environmental hygiene2011
Evaluation and comparison of three exposure assessment techniques.
Article in Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effect of occupational exposure to noise on ischaemic heart disease, stroke and hypertension: A systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-Related Burden of Disease and Injury.Environment international · 2021Pooled it
- Occupational noise exposure of utility workers using task based and full shift measurement comparisons.Heliyon · 2022Article
- Lifetime exposure to self-reported occupational noise and prevalent rheumatoid arthritis in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2011-2012).International journal of occupational and environmental health · 2017Article
- Comparison of Multiple Measures of Noise Exposure in Paper Mills.The Annals of occupational hygiene · 2016Article
- Heart Rate, Stress, and Occupational Noise Exposure among Electronic Waste Recycling Workers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2016Article
- Assessment of Noise Exposure to Children: Considerations for the National Children's Study.Journal of pregnancy and child health · 2014Article
- Spatial variation in environmental noise and air pollution in New York City.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2014Article
- Statistical performance of observational work sampling for assessment of categorical exposure variables: a simulation approach illustrated using PATH data.The Annals of occupational hygiene · 2014Article
- Methods for evaluating temporal trends in noise exposure.International journal of audiology · 2014Article
- Safety and health hazard observations in Hmong farming operations.Journal of agromedicine · 2014Article
- Pilot task-based assessment of noise levels among firefighters.International journal of industrial ergonomics · 2013Article
- 10-Year prospective study of noise exposure and hearing damage among construction workers.Occupational and environmental medicine · 2012Article
- Exposures to transit and other sources of noise among New York City residents.Environmental science & technology · 2012Article
- Longitudinal assessment of noise exposure in a cohort of construction workers.The Annals of occupational hygiene · 2011Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study was conducted to verify the performance of a recently developed subjective rating (SR) exposure assessment technique and to compare estimates made using this and two other techniques (trade mean, or TM, and task-based, or TB, approaches) to measured exposures. Subjects (n = 68) each completed three full-shift noise measurements over 4 months. Individual measured mean exposures were created by averaging each subject's repeated measurements, and TM, TB, and SR estimates were created using noise levels from worksites external to the current study. The bias, precision, accuracy, and absolute agreement of estimates created using the three techniques were evaluated by comparing estimated exposures with measured exposures. Trade mean estimates showed little bias, while neither the TM nor the SR techniques produced unbiased estimates, and the SR estimates showed the greatest bias of the three techniques. Accuracy was essentially equivalent among the three techniques. All three techniques showed poor agreement with measured exposures and were not highly correlated with each other. Estimates from the SR technique generally performed similarly to the TM and TB techniques. Methods to incorporate information from each technique into exposure estimates should be explored.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.