Teschke K, Kennedy S M, Olshan A F
Department of Health Care and Epidemiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Am J Ind Med. 1994 Sep;26(3):327-37. doi: 10.1002/ajim.4700260306.
During an exposure monitoring study, 78 saw maintenance tradesmen were randomly assigned to be interviewed about their exposures using one of two questionnaire formats: open-ended and partly prompted questions about five categories of materials; and detailed prompting about 75 agents. The more open-ended questionnaire elicited fewer exposure responses overall, but more responses about agents not included on the detailed questionnaire. Composite materials and trade name products were more frequently cited as exposures than individual metals or compounds. Validity of responses was ascertained using air measurements (individual metals) or observations of the employees (composite materials). Sums of sensitivities and specificities were very low (near 1.0) for most of the metals for both types of questionnaire. For composite materials, validity improved substantially. Sensitivities with the partly promoted format (0.44-0.85) were always lower than with detailed prompting (0.80-1.00). Specificities were usually, but not always, higher with partial prompting (0.66-0.92) than with detailed prompting (0.18-0.86). Selection of questionnaire format for an epidemiologic study would depend on the likely prevalence of exposure in controls and the effects of trade-offs in sensitivity and specificity.
在一项暴露监测研究中，78名锯木维护 tradesmen被随机分配，使用两种问卷形式之一接受关于其暴露情况的访谈：一种是开放式问卷，针对五类材料提出部分提示性问题；另一种是针对75种物质的详细提示性问卷。总体而言，开放式问卷引出的暴露反应较少，但关于详细问卷未涵盖的物质的反应较多。复合材料和商品名产品被提及为暴露源的频率高于单一金属或化合物。通过空气测量（针对单一金属）或对员工的观察（针对复合材料）来确定反应的有效性。对于两种问卷类型中的大多数金属，敏感性和特异性之和都非常低（接近1.0）。对于复合材料，有效性有显著提高。部分提示形式的敏感性（0.44 - 0.85）始终低于详细提示形式（0.80 - 1.00）。部分提示形式的特异性通常（但并非总是）高于详细提示形式（0.66 - 0.92对0.18 - 0.86）。为流行病学研究选择问卷形式将取决于对照组中暴露的可能患病率以及敏感性和特异性权衡的影响。
