Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ahrens, W.
Right arrow Articles by Berrino, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ahrens, W.
Right arrow Articles by Berrino, F.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal of Epidemiology, Vol 22, S83-S95, Copyright © 1993 by International Epidemiological Association


ARTICLES

Retrospective assessment of asbestos exposure--I. Case-control analysis in a study of lung cancer: efficiency of job-specific questionnaires and job exposure matrices

W Ahrens, KH Jockel, P Brochard, U Bolm-Audorff, K Grossgarten, Y Iwatsubo, E Orlowski, H Pohlabeln and F Berrino
Bremer Institut fur Praventionsforschung und Sozialmedizin, Bremen, Germany.

Retrospective assessment of asbestos exposure--I. Case-control analysis in a study of lung cancer: efficiency of job-specific questionnaires and job exposure matrices. International Journal of Epidemiology 1993; 22 (Suppl. 2): S83-S95. In a lung cancer study in Northern Germany the asbestos exposure assessment obtained from detailed supplementary questionnaires (SQ) was compared to the assessment obtained by the application of two job exposure matrices (JEM) to the job history. The study includes 391 incident male cases and the same number of controls from the general population, matched by sex, age, and region. Almost 16% of the subjects are considered as never having been exposed to asbestos and 24% are classified as certainly exposed according to both of the JEM, the corresponding percentages of the SQ-method being 68% and 32%. Sixty percent are considered by the JEM as having an intermediate probability of exposure. In general, the agreement between the different methods is better when the exposure definition is restricted to definite exposures, the corresponding Kappa statistic being 0.67 for the comparison between both JEM and 0.44/0.39 between the JEM and the SQ. The positive agreement between SQ and JEM (reference) increases from 12% and 17% for subjects with low probability of exposure to 61% and 69% for those with definite exposures. A ranking according to cumulative exposure shows some dose- response relationship for each of the three methods with a smoking- adjusted OR in the highest category of 1.85 (95% CI: 1.01-3.38) for the SQ method and 2.47 (95% CI: 1.40-4.37) and 2.94 (95% CI: 1.73-4.99) for the two JEM. The results are discussed with reference to the conceptual differences between the methods and their potential scope in future studies.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Int J EpidemiolHome page
M. Kogevinas
Commentary: Standardized coding of occupational data in epidemiological studies
Int. J. Epidemiol., June 1, 2003; 32(3): 428 - 429.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Occup. Environ. Med.Home page
H Pohlabeln, P Wild, W Schill, W Ahrens, I Jahn, U Bolm-Audorff, and K-H Jockel
Asbestos fibreyears and lung cancer: a two phase case-control study with expert exposure assessment
Occup. Environ. Med., June 1, 2002; 59(6): 410 - 414.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.