149. Exposure Assessment for Respiratory Sensitizers and Irritants: Expert Assessment Versus Subject Assessment of Exposure Based on Telephone Questionnaire Responses in an HMO-Based Study of Occupational Asthma

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Hunt ◽  
R. Herrick ◽  
A. Marx ◽  
S. Sama ◽  
D. Milton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Exposure Assessment ◽  
Occupational Asthma ◽  
Expert Assessment ◽  
Telephone Questionnaire

Environmental and occupational asthma. Exposure assessment

CHEST Journal ◽  
1990 ◽  
Vol 98 (5) ◽  
pp. 209S-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Newman-Taylor ◽  
R. D. Tee
Keyword(s):  
Exposure Assessment ◽  
Occupational Asthma

scholarly journals Rule-based exposure assessment versus case-by-case expert assessment using the same information in a community-based study

2013 ◽  
Vol 71 (3) ◽  
pp. 215-219 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Peters ◽  
Deborah C Glass ◽  
Elizabeth Milne ◽  
Lin Fritschi ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Exposure Assessment ◽  
Expert Assessment ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Rule Based

scholarly journals Investigation of Occupational Asthma: Do Clinicians Fail to Identify rRelevant Occupational Exposures?

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 341-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlo de Olim ◽  
Denis Bégin ◽  
Louis-Philippe Boulet ◽  
André Cartier ◽  
Michel Gérin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Evaluation ◽  
Occupational Asthma ◽  
Occupational Exposures ◽  
Epidemiological Studies ◽  
Assessment Method ◽  
Causal Agent ◽  
Work Place ◽  
Expert Assessment ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Specific Agent

BACKGROUND: Specific inhalation challenges (SIC) enable the identification of the agent responsible of occupational asthma (OA). A clinician may fail to identify a specific agent in the workplace, which may potentially lead to a misdiagnosis. The expert assessment method performed by an occupational hygienist has been used to evaluate occupational exposures in epidemiological studies.OBJECTIVE: The broad aim of the present study was to evaluate the contribution of an expert assessment performed by an occupational hygienist to the diagnosis of OA. The specific aim was to compare work-place exposures identified by an occupational hygienist and by chest physicians in subjects with positive SICs and subjects with asthma, but with a negative SIC.METHODS: SICs were performed in 120 cases: 67 were positive and 53 were negative. A clinician assessed occupational exposures to sensitizers during a routine clinical evaluation preceding the performance of the SIC. An expert assessment of occupational exposures was performed by an occupational hygienist blind to the result of the SIC.RESULTS: The occupational hygienist identified the causal agent in 96.7% of the 61 cases of positive SIC. In 33 (62.3%) cases of negative SICs, the occupational hygienist identified ≥1 sensitizing agent(s) that had not been identified by the clinician.CONCLUSION: The hygienist identified the causal agent in almost all subjects with OA. In contrast, the clinician failed to identify potential exposures to sensitizers in >60% of the negative SIC subjects, which may have resulted in some subjects being misdiagnosed as not having OA.

Measuring “Language Access Profiles” in Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Children With the DHH Language Exposure Assessment Tool

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Matthew L. Hall ◽  
Stephanie De Anda
Keyword(s):  
Cluster Analysis ◽  
Exposure Assessment ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
Communication Mode ◽  
Developmental Potential ◽  
Language Access ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Language Exposure ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Purpose The purposes of this study were (a) to introduce “language access profiles” as a viable alternative construct to “communication mode” for describing experience with language input during early childhood for deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children; (b) to describe the development of a new tool for measuring DHH children's language access profiles during infancy and toddlerhood; and (c) to evaluate the novelty, reliability, and validity of this tool. Method We adapted an existing retrospective parent report measure of early language experience (the Language Exposure Assessment Tool) to make it suitable for use with DHH populations. We administered the adapted instrument (DHH Language Exposure Assessment Tool [D-LEAT]) to the caregivers of 105 DHH children aged 12 years and younger. To measure convergent validity, we also administered another novel instrument: the Language Access Profile Tool. To measure test–retest reliability, half of the participants were interviewed again after 1 month. We identified groups of children with similar language access profiles by using hierarchical cluster analysis. Results The D-LEAT revealed DHH children's diverse experiences with access to language during infancy and toddlerhood. Cluster analysis groupings were markedly different from those derived from more traditional grouping rules (e.g., communication modes). Test–retest reliability was good, especially for the same-interviewer condition. Content, convergent, and face validity were strong. Conclusions To optimize DHH children's developmental potential, stakeholders who work at the individual and population levels would benefit from replacing communication mode with language access profiles. The D-LEAT is the first tool that aims to measure this novel construct. Despite limitations that future work aims to address, the present results demonstrate that the D-LEAT represents progress over the status quo.

Occupational asthma caused by triglycidyl isocyanurate (TGIC)

1997 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 510-514 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. PIIRILA ◽  
T. ESTLANDER ◽  
H. KESKINEN ◽  
R. JOLANKI ◽  
A. LAAKKONEN ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Occupational Asthma ◽  
Triglycidyl Isocyanurate
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document