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
. 2024 Apr 22;68(4):397-408.
doi: 10.1093/annweh/wxae017.

Development of the Korean construction job exposure matrix (KoConJEM) based on experts' judgment using the 60 consolidated occupations for construction workers

Sangjun Choi  1   2 , Kwang Min Lee  3 , Hyunhee Park  4 , Gyu-Beom Shim  5 , Sun Woo Lee  6 , Yoon-Ji Kim  7 , Eun-Soo Lee  3 , Youngki Kim  3   7 , Dongmug Kang  3   7 , Ju-Hyun Park  8 , Se-Yeong Kim  3   7
Affiliations

Development of the Korean construction job exposure matrix (KoConJEM) based on experts' judgment using the 60 consolidated occupations for construction workers

Sangjun Choi et al. Ann Work Expo Health. .

Abstract

Background: This study was conducted as an effort to develop a Korean construction job exposure matrix (KoConJEM) based on 60 occupations recently consolidated by the construction workers mutual aid association for use by the construction industry.

Methods: The probability, intensity, and prevalence of exposure to 26 hazardous agents for 60 consolidated occupations were evaluated as binary (Yes/No) or four categories (1 to 4) by 30 industrial hygiene experts. The score for risk was calculated by multiplying the exposure intensity by the prevalence of exposure. Fleiss' kappa for each hazardous agent and occupation was used to determine agreement among the 30 experts. The JEM was expressed on a heatmap and a web-based dashboard to facilitate comparison of factors affecting exposure according to each occupation and hazardous agent.

Results: Awkward posture, heat/cold, heavy lifting, and noise were hazardous agents regarded as exposure is probable by at least one or more experts in all occupations, while exposure to asphalt fumes was considered hazardous in the smallest number of occupations (n = 5). Based on the degree of agreement among experts, more than half of the harmful factors and most occupations showed fair to good results. The highest risk value was 16 for awkward posture for most occupations other than safety officer.

Conclusions: The KoConJEM provides information on the probability, intensity, and prevalence of exposure to harmful factors, including most occupations employing construction workers; therefore, it may be useful in the conduct of epidemiological studies on assessment of health risk for construction workers.

Keywords: intensity; prevalence; probability; risk.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Flow diagram for development of the job-exposure matrix for construction workers (CWMAA, Construction Workers Mutual Aid Association).
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
Heatmap of the risk across 60 occupations and 26 agents evaluated by experts. The values shown in the cells indicate the maximum risk. (AD, asbestos dust; AF, asphalt fume; AK, awkward posture; AP, abnormal pressure; CD, cement dust; CM, carbon monoxide; DEE, diesel engine exhaust; EP, epoxy; GF, glass fiber dust; GP, gypsum; H/C, heat/cold; HC, hexavalent chromium; HL, heavy lifting; HR, harmful rays; IC, isocyanate; MC, microbe; MF, metal fume; NS, noise; OM, other metals; OMD, other mineral dust; OS, organic solvents; Pb, lead; SL, silica; VB, vibration; WD, wood dust; WP, wood preservative).
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
Dashboard illustrating the average risk and 95th percentile values by occupation and hazardous agent while adjusting the results for exposure probability.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.
Comparison of the results from evaluation of the probability, intensity, and prevalence of exposure for painters by 30 experts. The number shown on the probability axis indicates the total number of agents painters may have exposure to. The number shown in the agent-specific colored box indicates the intensity and prevalence.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 5.
Results of assessment comparing the intensity and prevalence of occupational hazards with probability of exposure greater than 70%. The median values shown in the agent-specific colored box indicate intensity and prevalence.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Altman DG. Practical statistics for medical research. New York: CRC press; 1990
    1. Benke G, Sim M, Fritschi L, Aldred G, Forbes A, Kauppinen T.. Comparison of occupational exposure using three different methods: hygiene panel, job exposure matrix (JEM), and self reports. Appl Occup Environ Hyg 2001:16(1):84–91. 10.1080/104732201456168 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Berrino F, Richiardi L, Boffetta P, Estéve J, Belletti I, Raymond L, Troschel L, Pisani P, Zubiri L, Ascunce Net al. .; Milan JEM Working Group. Occupation and larynx and hypopharynx cancer: a job-exposure matrix approach in an international case–control study in France, Italy, Spain and Switzerland. Cancer Causes Control: CCC 2003:14(3):213–223. 10.1023/a:1023661206177 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Choi S, Kang D, Park D, Lee H, Choi B.. Developing asbestos job exposure matrix using occupation and industry specific exposure data (1984–2008) in Republic of Korea. Safety Health Work 2017:8(1):105–115. 10.1016/j.shaw.2016.09.002 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Choi SD, Guo L, Kim J, Xiong S.. Comparison of fatal occupational injuries in construction industry in the United States, South Korea, and China. Int J Ind Ergon. 2019:71(1):64–74. 10.1016/j.ergon.2019.02.011 - DOI

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources