The relation between subjective dust exposure estimates and quantitative dust exposure measurements in california agriculture

Mark J. Nieuwenhuijsen, Kyle S. Noderer, Marc B Schenker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Measuring exposure levels for epidemiologic research is time consuming and expensive and therefore subjective exposure estimates are sometimes used instead. In this study we related the subjective dust exposure estimates of workers in California agriculture to personal dust exposure measurements. One hundred and twenty-four observations were available for comparison of subjective dust estimates and inhalable dust measurements and 129 observations for comparison of subjective dust estimates and respirable dust measurements. Individual subjective dust estimates showed weak to moderate correlations with measured dust concentrations for both the inhalable (R(s) = 0.67) and respirable dust fraction (R(s) = 0.36). The within-worker reliability coefficients were low (0.2 and 0.1, respectively). Grouped subjective dust estimates performed better and showed a consistent increase with average measured dust levels, in particular for the inhalable dust fraction (R2 = 0.81). Age, the number of years working in agriculture, education level, the presence of any respiratory symptoms, and the language of the questionnaire did not have a significant independent effect on the relationship between measured dust levels and subjective dust estimates. California agricultural workers appear to be reasonably good at estimating inhalable dust levels, in particular if an average of many different workers is taken, but they are unable to provide good estimates of respirable dust levels. Measuring dust levels remains the preferred option.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)355-363
Number of pages9
JournalAmerican Journal of Industrial Medicine
Volume32
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1997

Fingerprint

Agriculture
Dust

Keywords

  • Agricultural dust
  • Data agreement
  • Exposure estimation
  • Occupational health

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

The relation between subjective dust exposure estimates and quantitative dust exposure measurements in california agriculture. / Nieuwenhuijsen, Mark J.; Noderer, Kyle S.; Schenker, Marc B.

In: American Journal of Industrial Medicine, Vol. 32, No. 4, 10.1997, p. 355-363.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{8971fb064df6423c9d16ab71614f6040,
title = "The relation between subjective dust exposure estimates and quantitative dust exposure measurements in california agriculture",
abstract = "Measuring exposure levels for epidemiologic research is time consuming and expensive and therefore subjective exposure estimates are sometimes used instead. In this study we related the subjective dust exposure estimates of workers in California agriculture to personal dust exposure measurements. One hundred and twenty-four observations were available for comparison of subjective dust estimates and inhalable dust measurements and 129 observations for comparison of subjective dust estimates and respirable dust measurements. Individual subjective dust estimates showed weak to moderate correlations with measured dust concentrations for both the inhalable (R(s) = 0.67) and respirable dust fraction (R(s) = 0.36). The within-worker reliability coefficients were low (0.2 and 0.1, respectively). Grouped subjective dust estimates performed better and showed a consistent increase with average measured dust levels, in particular for the inhalable dust fraction (R2 = 0.81). Age, the number of years working in agriculture, education level, the presence of any respiratory symptoms, and the language of the questionnaire did not have a significant independent effect on the relationship between measured dust levels and subjective dust estimates. California agricultural workers appear to be reasonably good at estimating inhalable dust levels, in particular if an average of many different workers is taken, but they are unable to provide good estimates of respirable dust levels. Measuring dust levels remains the preferred option.",
keywords = "Agricultural dust, Data agreement, Exposure estimation, Occupational health",
author = "Nieuwenhuijsen, {Mark J.} and Noderer, {Kyle S.} and Schenker, {Marc B}",
year = "1997",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199710)32:4<355::AID-AJIM6>3.0.CO;2-T",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "355--363",
journal = "American Journal of Industrial Medicine",
issn = "0271-3586",
publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The relation between subjective dust exposure estimates and quantitative dust exposure measurements in california agriculture

AU - Nieuwenhuijsen, Mark J.

AU - Noderer, Kyle S.

AU - Schenker, Marc B

PY - 1997/10

Y1 - 1997/10

N2 - Measuring exposure levels for epidemiologic research is time consuming and expensive and therefore subjective exposure estimates are sometimes used instead. In this study we related the subjective dust exposure estimates of workers in California agriculture to personal dust exposure measurements. One hundred and twenty-four observations were available for comparison of subjective dust estimates and inhalable dust measurements and 129 observations for comparison of subjective dust estimates and respirable dust measurements. Individual subjective dust estimates showed weak to moderate correlations with measured dust concentrations for both the inhalable (R(s) = 0.67) and respirable dust fraction (R(s) = 0.36). The within-worker reliability coefficients were low (0.2 and 0.1, respectively). Grouped subjective dust estimates performed better and showed a consistent increase with average measured dust levels, in particular for the inhalable dust fraction (R2 = 0.81). Age, the number of years working in agriculture, education level, the presence of any respiratory symptoms, and the language of the questionnaire did not have a significant independent effect on the relationship between measured dust levels and subjective dust estimates. California agricultural workers appear to be reasonably good at estimating inhalable dust levels, in particular if an average of many different workers is taken, but they are unable to provide good estimates of respirable dust levels. Measuring dust levels remains the preferred option.

AB - Measuring exposure levels for epidemiologic research is time consuming and expensive and therefore subjective exposure estimates are sometimes used instead. In this study we related the subjective dust exposure estimates of workers in California agriculture to personal dust exposure measurements. One hundred and twenty-four observations were available for comparison of subjective dust estimates and inhalable dust measurements and 129 observations for comparison of subjective dust estimates and respirable dust measurements. Individual subjective dust estimates showed weak to moderate correlations with measured dust concentrations for both the inhalable (R(s) = 0.67) and respirable dust fraction (R(s) = 0.36). The within-worker reliability coefficients were low (0.2 and 0.1, respectively). Grouped subjective dust estimates performed better and showed a consistent increase with average measured dust levels, in particular for the inhalable dust fraction (R2 = 0.81). Age, the number of years working in agriculture, education level, the presence of any respiratory symptoms, and the language of the questionnaire did not have a significant independent effect on the relationship between measured dust levels and subjective dust estimates. California agricultural workers appear to be reasonably good at estimating inhalable dust levels, in particular if an average of many different workers is taken, but they are unable to provide good estimates of respirable dust levels. Measuring dust levels remains the preferred option.

KW - Agricultural dust

KW - Data agreement

KW - Exposure estimation

KW - Occupational health

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030755676&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030755676&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199710)32:4<355::AID-AJIM6>3.0.CO;2-T

DO - 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199710)32:4<355::AID-AJIM6>3.0.CO;2-T

M3 - Article

C2 - 9258389

AN - SCOPUS:0030755676

VL - 32

SP - 355

EP - 363

JO - American Journal of Industrial Medicine

JF - American Journal of Industrial Medicine

SN - 0271-3586

IS - 4

ER -