Academic Journals Database
Disseminating quality controlled scientific knowledge

The agreement between workers and within workers in regard to occupational exposure to mercury in dental practice assessed from a questionnaire and an interview

ADD TO MY LIST
 
Author(s): Svendsen Kristin | Hilt Bjørn

Journal: Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology
ISSN 1745-6673

Volume: 6;
Issue: 1;
Start page: 8;
Date: 2011;
Original page

Keywords: epidemiology | retrospective exposure assessment | misclassification

ABSTRACT
Abstract Background The correct assessment and classification of exposure is essential in epidemiology. The validity of exposure data obtained by the use of questionnaires is, however, seldom evaluated. When conducting a study on the possible health effects from mercury exposure in dental practice, we compared answers on exposure from a job-specific questionnaire with answers to the same questions given at an interview 6 to 18 months later. Methods We examined the concordance between workers by comparing answers to the questionnaire given by persons working in the same clinics during the same time spans and the agreement within workers by comparing answers to the same questions from a questionnaire and from an interview. Other aims were to see if there was a difference in the answers to the questionnaire across job titles and to study the impact of missing information on the response rate in a detailed questionnaire. Results There was a marked difference between the pairs of employees working in the same clinic regarding the start and termination years for the different preparation methods, and this was partly independent of their occupation. Kappa values for using different preparation methods in the questionnaire and at the interview varied between 0.41(moderate) to 0.88(very good). Conclusions The results of this study indicate that a mailed questionnaire will cause misclassification of exposure. The observed occurrence of false positive exposure classifications from the questionnaire compared to the interview was higher than for false negative. This is important and may result in serious bias if the prevalence of exposure is low. Due to missing information, detailed questionnaires may also be inefficient if the goal is to construct exposure measures from combinations of several answers in the questionnaire.
Affiliate Program     

Tango Jona
Tangokurs Rapperswil-Jona