Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2011 May;8(5):310-23.
doi: 10.1080/15459624.2011.568832.

Evaluation and comparison of three exposure assessment techniques

R L Neitzel  1 , W E Daniell, L Sheppard, H W Davies, N S Seixas
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Evaluation and comparison of three exposure assessment techniques

R L Neitzel et al. J Occup Environ Hyg. 2011 May.

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Measured mean exposure level and individual exposure estimates (dBA) for five measures (n = 68 subjects)
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Exposure estimates (dBA) at worker level based on internal (y axis) and external (x axis) noise levels for the TM, TB, and “Percent time in noise” SR measure (n = 68 subjects)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Neitzel R, Daniell W, Sheppard L, Davies H, Seixas N. Comparison of perceived and quantitative measures of occupational noise exposure. Ann Occup Hyg. 2009;53(1):41–54. - PubMed
    1. Neitzel R, Daniell W, Sheppard L, Davies H, Seixas N. Improving exposure assessment by combining exposure information. Ann Occup Hyg. [In press] - PubMed
    1. Nieuwenhuijsen MJ. Exposure assessment in occupational epidemiology: Measuring present exposures with an example of a study of occupational asthma. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 1997;70:295–308. - PubMed
    1. Nieuwenhuijsen M, Paustenbach D, Duarte-Davidson R. New developments in exposure assessment: The impact on the practice of health risk assessment and epidemiological studies. Environ Int. 2006;32(8):996–1009. - PubMed
    1. Drummond I, Murray N, Armstrong T, Schnatter AR, Lewis RJ. Exposure assessment methods for a study of mortality and cancer morbidity in relation to specific petroleum industry exposures. J Occup Environ Hyg. 2006;3:513–520. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources