Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35162257›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Theoretical Background of Occupational-Exposure Models-Report of an Expert Workshop of the ISES Europe Working Group "Exposure Models".

Urs Schlüter, Susan Arnold, Francesca Borghi, John Cherrie, Wouter Fransman, Henri Heussen, Michael Jayjock, Keld Alstrup Jensen, Joonas Koivisto, Dorothea Koppisch and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Urs SchlüterUnit "Exposure Scenarios", Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health-BAuA, Friedrich-Henkel-Weg 1-25, 44149 Dortmund, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2735-9307
Susan ArnoldDivision of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota MMC 807, Room 1239 Mayo, 420 Delaware Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA.
Francesca BorghiDepartment of Science and High Technology, University of Insubria, via Valleggio 11, 22100 Como, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3452-2803
John CherrieInstitute of Occupational Medicine, Research Avenue North, Edinburgh EH14 3AP, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8901-6890
Wouter FransmanDepartment Risk Analysis for Products in Development, TNO, P.O. Box 80015, 3508 TA Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Henri HeussenCosanta BV, Stationsplein Noord-Oost 202, 1117 CJ Schiphol-Oost, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4582-7795
Michael JayjockJayjock Associates, LLC, 168 Mill Pond Place, Langhorne, PA 19047, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7087-6679
Keld Alstrup JensenNational Research Centre for the Working Environment, 105 Lersø Parkallé, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-2764-3634
Joonas KoivistoARCHE Consulting, Liefkensstraat 35D, 9032 Wondelgem, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-6769-1999
Dorothea KoppischSection Exposure Monitoring-MGU, IFA-Institute for Occupational Safety and Health of the German Social Accident Insurance, Alte Heerstrasse 111, 53757 Sankt Augustin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6853-4736
Jessica MeyerUnit "Exposure Scenarios", Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health-BAuA, Friedrich-Henkel-Weg 1-25, 44149 Dortmund, Germany.
Andrea SpinazzèDepartment of Science and High Technology, University of Insubria, via Valleggio 11, 22100 Como, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0371-3164
Celia TanarroExposure and Supply Chain Unit, European Chemicals Agency, ECHA, P.O. Box 400, FI-00121 Helsinki, Finland.
Steven VerpaeleHealth, Environment and Public Policy Department, Nickel Institute, Rue Belliard 12, 1040 Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-3631-6464
Natalie von GoetzFOPH-Federal Office of Public Health, Schwarzenburgstr. 157, 3003 Berne, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

On 20 October 2020, the Working Group "Exposure Models" of the Europe Regional Chapter of the International Society of Exposure Science (ISES Europe) organised an online workshop to discuss the theoretical background of models for the assessment of occupational exposure to chemicals. In this report, participants of the workshop with an active role before and during the workshop summarise the most relevant discussion points and conclusions of this well-attended workshop. ISES Europe has identified exposure modelling as one priority area for the strategic development of exposure science in Europe in the coming years. This specific workshop aimed to discuss the main challenges in developing, validating, and using occupational-exposure models for regulatory purposes. The theoretical background, application domain, and limitations of different modelling approaches were presented and discussed, focusing on empirical "modifying-factor" or "mass-balance-based" approaches. During the discussions, these approaches were compared and analysed. Possibilities to address the discussed challenges could be a validation study involving alternative modelling approaches. The wider discussion touched upon the close relationship between modelling and monitoring and the need for better linkage of the methods and the need for common monitoring databases that include data on model parameters.

Indexed as

Occupational ExposureDatabases, FactualEuropeHumansModels, Theoreticalmass-balance modelmodifying-factor modeloccupational-exposure modellingregulatory exposure modellingworkshop

Identifiers

PMID35162257
PMCPMC8834988

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.