Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, NIH, DHHS, Bethesda, Maryland.
National Research Centre for Radiation Medicine, Kyiv, Ukraine.
Radiat Res. 2022 Aug 1;198(2):172-180. doi: 10.1667/RADE-21-00207.1.
This original study aims to quantify the human factor uncertainties in radiation doses for Chernobyl cleanup workers that are associated with errors in direct or proxy personal interviews due to poor memory recall a long time after exposure. Two types of doses due to external irradiation during cleanup mission were calculated independently. First, a "reference" dose, that was calculated using the historical description of cleanup activities reported by 47 cleanup workers shortly after the completion of the cleanup mission. Second, a "current" dose that was calculated using information reported by 47 cleanup workers and respective 24 proxies (colleagues) nominated by cleanup workers during a personal interview conducted more recently, as part of this study, i.e., 25-30 years after their cleanup missions. The Jaccard similarity coefficient for reference and current doses was moderate: the arithmetic mean ± standard deviation was 0.29 ± 0.18 (median = 0.31) and 0.23 ± 0.18 (median = 0.22) for the cleanup worker's and proxy's interviews, respectively. The agreement between two doses was better if the cleanup worker was interviewed rather than his proxy: the median ratio of current to reference dose was 1.0 and 0.56 for cleanup workers and proxies, respectively. The present study has shown that human factor uncertainties lead to underestimation or overestimation of the "true" reference dose for most cleanup workers up to 3 times. In turn, the potential impact of these errors on radiation-related risk estimates should be assessed.
本原始研究旨在量化与切尔诺贝利清理工人因记忆不佳而导致的直接或间接个人访谈中出现错误相关的辐射剂量的人为因素不确定性。独立计算了两种因清理任务中外照射而导致的剂量。首先,计算了“参考”剂量,该剂量是根据 47 名清理工人在清理任务完成后不久报告的清理活动的历史描述计算得出的。其次,计算了“当前”剂量,该剂量是根据 47 名清理工人和各自的 24 名代理人(同事)在最近一次个人访谈中报告的信息计算得出的,该访谈是作为本研究的一部分进行的,即在他们完成清理任务后的 25-30 年内。参考剂量和当前剂量的杰卡德相似系数适中:算术平均值±标准偏差分别为 0.29±0.18(中位数=0.31)和 0.23±0.18(中位数=0.22),分别用于清理工人和代理人的访谈。如果是清理工人而不是他的代理人接受访谈,则两种剂量之间的一致性更好:当前剂量与参考剂量的中位数比值分别为 1.0 和 0.56,用于清理工人和代理人。本研究表明,人为因素不确定性导致大多数清理工人的“真实”参考剂量被低估或高估了 3 倍。反过来,应该评估这些错误对与辐射相关的风险估计的潜在影响。