Seltzer B L, Murphy D J, Yesalis C E
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Pennsylvania State University, University Park 16802.
Am J Ind Med. 1990;18(2):201-9. doi: 10.1002/ajim.4700180212.
Due to the lack of a standardized methodology to identify agriculturally related fatalities and the inaccuracy of data from death certificates, NSC's and NIOSH's estimates of the level of agriculturally related fatalities conflict, and the validity of both is subject to criticism. A follow-up survey with the next of kin of 107 potential agricultural fatalities, from a pool of 150 Pennsylvania cases, has been conducted. This paper details the methods and success in gaining supplemental information. Next of kin were generally willing to provide the information (67%), with both telephone (66%) and mail (68%) methods generating comparable levels of cooperation. The optimal time frame for finding current addresses and telephone numbers as well as for gaining cooperation appeared to be about 1 year after the fatality. However, a retrospective investigation of up to 3 years past the anniversary of the fatality produced an acceptable rate of cooperation. How the collected data compares with fatality data for agriculture published by NSC and N1OSH has been addressed in another paper.
由于缺乏用于识别农业相关死亡事故的标准化方法，且死亡证明数据不准确，国家安全委员会（NSC）和美国国家职业安全与健康研究所（NIOSH）对农业相关死亡事故水平的估计存在冲突，且二者的有效性均受到质疑。对宾夕法尼亚州150起案例中的107起潜在农业死亡事故的近亲进行了后续调查。本文详细介绍了获取补充信息的方法及成果。近亲通常愿意提供信息（67%），通过电话（66%）和邮件（68%）方式获得的合作程度相当。找到当前地址和电话号码以及获得合作的最佳时间框架似乎是在死亡事故发生后约1年。然而，对死亡事故周年纪念日过去长达3年的回顾性调查也产生了可接受的合作率。另一篇论文探讨了所收集的数据与NSC和NIOSH公布的农业死亡数据相比情况如何。
