Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
J Occup Environ Hyg. 2021 Oct-Nov;18(10-11):522-531. doi: 10.1080/15459624.2021.1976412. Epub 2021 Oct 11.
The objective of this paper was to estimate the inter-rater reliability of expert assessments of occupational exposures. An inter-rater reliability sub-study was conducted within a population-based case-control study of postmenopausal breast cancer. Detailed information on lifetime occupational histories was obtained from participants and two industrial hygienists assigned exposures to 185 jobs using a checklist of 293 agents. Experts rated exposure for each job-agent combination according to exposure status (unexposed/exposed), confidence that the exposure occurred (possible/probable/definite), intensity (low/medium/high), and frequency (% time per week). The statistical unit of observation was each job-agent assessment (185 jobs × 293 agents = 54,205 assessments per expert). Crude agreement, Gwet AC1/2 statistics, and Cohen's Kappa were used to estimate inter-rater agreement for confidence and intensity; for frequency, the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was used. The majority of job-agent combinations were evaluated by the two experts to be not exposed (crude agreement >98% of decisions). The degree of agreement between the experts for the confidence of exposure status was Gwet AC1/2 = 0.99 (95% CI: 0.99-0.99), and for intensity, a Gwet AC2 = 0.99 (95% CI: 0.99-0.99). For frequency, an ICC of 0.31 (95% CI: 0.26-0.35) was found. A sub-analysis restricted to job-agent combinations for which the two experts agreed on exposure status revealed a moderate agreement for confidence of exposure (Gwet AC2 = 0.66) and high agreement for intensity (Gwet AC2 = 0.96). For frequency, the ICC was 0.52 (95% CI: 0.47-0.57). A high level of inter-rater agreement was found for identifying exposures and for coding intensity, but agreement was lower for the coding of frequency of exposure.
本文旨在评估专家对职业暴露评估的组内一致性。在一项基于人群的绝经后乳腺癌病例对照研究中进行了组内一致性子研究。通过参与者和两名工业卫生学家完成的 293 种制剂清单,详细的职业暴露史信息从参与者处获得。专家根据暴露状态(未暴露/暴露)、对暴露发生的置信度(可能/可能/确定)、强度(低/中/高)和频率(每周%时间)对每个职业-制剂组合进行暴露评估。观察的统计单位是每个职业-制剂评估(185 个职业×293 种制剂=每个专家 54,205 次评估)。使用粗一致性、Gwet AC1/2 统计量和 Cohen's Kappa 来评估置信度和强度的组内一致性;对于频率,使用组内相关系数(ICC)。两位专家评估的大多数职业-制剂组合被判定为未暴露(粗一致性>98%的决策)。专家对暴露状态的置信度评估结果高度一致,Gwet AC1/2=0.99(95%置信区间:0.99-0.99),对强度的评估结果高度一致,Gwet AC2=0.99(95%置信区间:0.99-0.99)。对于频率,发现 ICC 为 0.31(95%置信区间:0.26-0.35)。一项仅限于两位专家对暴露状态达成一致的职业-制剂组合的子分析显示,暴露置信度具有中等一致性(Gwet AC2=0.66),强度具有高度一致性(Gwet AC2=0.96)。对于频率,ICC 为 0.52(95%置信区间:0.47-0.57)。对于识别暴露和编码强度,发现组内一致性程度很高,但对暴露频率的编码一致性程度较低。