Suppr超能文献

在一项基于人群的病例对照研究中评估职业暴露:邮政问卷与个人访谈的比较。

Assessment of occupational exposure in a population based case-control study: comparing postal questionnaires with personal interviews.

作者信息

Blatter B M, Roeleveld N, Zielhuis G A, Verbeek A L

机构信息

Department of Medical Informatics, Epidemiology and Statistics, University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Occup Environ Med. 1997 Jan;54(1):54-9. doi: 10.1136/oem.54.1.54.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In case-control studies, data collection on occupational exposures by means of personal interviews is usually costly and time consuming. As detailed semiquantitative information on exposure from these interviews often has to be dichotomised in the analyses due to the small numbers of exposed subjects, the question is raised whether simple postal questionnaires yield the same results for occupational exposure in epidemiological studies as job specific personal interviews.

METHODS

Data on occupational exposures during pregnancy were compared from 121 women who both completed a checklist with 17 occupational exposure categories in a postal questionnaire and were personally interviewed with specific questions on exposure with details of job and task. kappa Coefficients were calculated as measures of agreement corrected for chance, and sensitivity and positive predictive values as measures of validity and usefulness, with the exposure assessment based on information from the interview as the gold standard.

RESULTS

Values of kappa varied from 0.09 for domestic cleaning agents to 0.70 for pesticides, indicating only low to moderate agreement between the questionnaire and the interview. Sensitivity ranged from 38% to 100%, with the highest values for agents used by healthcare workers. Positive predictive values were lower, between 9% and 63%, which indicates that overreporting was more common than underreporting in the questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

These results underline the high potential for misclassification of occupational exposure in studies based on questionnaires. Therefore, postal questionnaires are not considered an alternative to job and task specific personal interviews in epidemiological studies.

摘要

背景

在病例对照研究中,通过个人访谈收集职业暴露数据通常成本高昂且耗时。由于暴露个体数量较少,在分析中往往不得不将这些访谈中获得的详细半定量暴露信息进行二分法处理,因此有人提出,在流行病学研究中,简单的邮寄问卷调查对于职业暴露所产生的结果是否与针对具体工作的个人访谈相同。

方法

比较了121名女性在孕期职业暴露的数据,这些女性既填写了一份包含17种职业暴露类别的邮寄问卷清单,又接受了关于暴露情况的具体问题的个人访谈,访谈涉及工作和任务细节。计算kappa系数作为对机遇校正后的一致性度量,计算敏感性和阳性预测值作为有效性和实用性的度量,以基于访谈信息的暴露评估作为金标准。

结果

kappa值从家用清洁剂的0.09到杀虫剂的0.70不等,表明问卷与访谈之间仅有低到中度的一致性。敏感性范围为38%至100%,医护人员使用的制剂敏感性最高。阳性预测值较低,在9%至63%之间,这表明问卷中报告过多的情况比报告不足更为常见。

结论

这些结果强调了在基于问卷的研究中职业暴露误分类的高可能性。因此,在流行病学研究中,邮寄问卷不被视为针对具体工作和任务的个人访谈的替代方法。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

1
Spina bifida and parental occupation.
Epidemiology. 1996 Mar;7(2):188-93. doi: 10.1097/00001648-199603000-00014.
5
Occupational epidemiology and assessment of exposure.职业流行病学与暴露评估
Int J Epidemiol. 1993;22 Suppl 2:S5-9. doi: 10.1093/ije/22.supplement_2.s5.
9
Validity of work histories obtained by interview for epidemiologic purposes.
Am J Epidemiol. 1983 Oct;118(4):583-91. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113663.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验