Files and links (1)
Published, Version of Record (VoR)CC BY-NC-ND V4.0, Open
Journal article
Occupational epidemiologist's quest to tame measurement error in exposure
Global Epidemiology, v 2, 100038
Nov 2020
Abstract
I aimed to assess current practices and opportunities for addressing the problem of errors in exposure in occupational epidemiology. Occupational epidemiologists appreciate that errors in exposure are a concern, but almost none correct for these errors, although there are currently no theoretical and practical barriers for this inertia. The most serious barrier to change is a faulty belief that a well-conducted epidemiologic study suffers only non-differential exposure misclassification and that its sole impact is to attenuate risk gradients, causing a false negative. On the contrary, differential exposure misclassification is the most defensible model in occupational epidemiology, and errors in exposure increase chance of both false positive and negative results. Resistance to mathematical adjustment for errors in exposure is equivalent to denying the value of more valid exposure estimates and undermines the discipline's relevance to protection of workers by informing workplace exposure limits.
Metrics
8 Record Views
2 citations in Scopus
Details
- Title
- Occupational epidemiologist's quest to tame measurement error in exposure
- Creators
- Igor Burstyn - Drexel University
- Publication Details
- Global Epidemiology, v 2, 100038
- Publisher
- Elsevier
- Resource Type
- Journal article
- Language
- English
- Academic Unit
- Environmental and Occupational Health
- Scopus ID
- 2-s2.0-85094624928
- Other Identifier
- 991019173680604721