Ann. occup. Hyg., Vol. 46, No. 5, pp. 479-487, 2002
© 2002 British Occupational Hygiene Society
Published by Oxford University Press
Combining Expert Ratings and Exposure Measurements: A Random Effect Paradigm
1 INRS, Department of Epidemiology, BP 23, 54501 Vandoeuvre Cedex; 2 University of Lyon, Lyon; 3 USINOR, Paris, France
Received 30 March 2001; in final form 8 February 2002
The aim of this paper is to present a paradigm for combining ordinal expert ratings with exposure measurements while accounting for a between-worker effect when estimating exposure group (EG)-specific means for epidemiological purposes. Expert judgement is used to classify the EGs into a limited number of exposure levels independently of the exposure measurements. The mean exposure of each EG is considered to be a random deviate from a central exposure rating-specific value. Combining this approach with the standard between-worker random effect model, we obtain a nested two-way model. Using Gibbs sampling, we can fit such models incorporating prior information on components of variance and modelling options to the rating-specific means. An approximate formula is presented estimating the mean exposure of each EG as a function of the geometric mean of the measurements in this EG, between and within EG standard deviations and the overall geometric mean, thus borrowing information from other EGs. We apply this paradigm to an actual data set of dust exposure measurements in a steel producing factory. Some EG-specific means are quite different from the estimates including the ratings. Rating-specific means could be estimated under different hypotheses. It is argued that when setting up an expert rating of exposures it is best done independently of existing exposure measurements. The present model is then a convenient framework in which to combine the two sources of information.
Keywords: expert information; exposure measurements; statistical methods
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  P. Logan, G. Ramachandran, J. Mulhausen, and P. Hewett Occupational Exposure Decisions: Can Limited Data Interpretation Training Help Improve Accuracy? Ann. Hyg., June 1, 2009; 53(4): 311 - 324. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E Bourgkard, P Wild, B Courcot, M Diss, J Ettlinger, P Goutet, D Hemon, N Marquis, J-M Mur, C Rigal, et al. Lung cancer mortality and iron oxide exposure in a French steel-producing factory Occup. Environ. Med., March 1, 2009; 66(3): 175 - 181. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Ramachandran Toward Better Exposure Assessment Strategies--The New NIOSH Initiative Ann. Hyg., July 1, 2008; 52(5): 297 - 301. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. OGDEN Annals of Occupational Hygiene at Volume 50: Many Achievements, a Few Mistakes, and an Interesting Future Ann. Hyg., November 1, 2006; 50(8): 751 - 764. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Leclerc Exposure assessment in ergonomic epidemiology: is there something specific to the assessment of biomechanical exposures? Occup. Environ. Med., March 1, 2005; 62(3): 143 - 144. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. BURDORF and M. V. TONGEREN Commentary: Variability in Workplace Exposures and the Design of Efficient Measurement and Control Strategies Ann. Hyg., March 1, 2003; 47(2): 95 - 99. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. A. SAULEAU, P. WILD, M. HOURS, A. LEPLAY, and A. BERGERET Comparison of Measurement Strategies for Prospective Occupational Epidemiology Ann. Hyg., March 1, 2003; 47(2): 101 - 110. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
I. BURSTYN and H. KROMHOUT Who Qualifies to be an Expert? Ann. Hyg., January 1, 2003; 47(1): 89 - 89. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
I. BURSTYN and H. KROMHOUT The Babel of Multicenter Exposure Assessment Ann. Hyg., September 1, 2002; 46(8): 649 - 652. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|