Developing a Job Exposure Matrix of Work Organization Hazards in the United States: A Review on Methodological Issues and Research Protocol

Abstract

Background Most job exposure matrices (JEMs) have been developed for chemical and physical hazards in the United States (US). In addition, the overall validity of most JEMs of work organization hazards using self-reported data in the literature remains to be further tested due to several methodological weaknesses. Methods This paper aims to review important methodological issues with regard to a JEM of work organization hazards using self-report data and to present a research protocol for developing a four-axis (job titles, hazards, sex, and time) JEM of major work organization hazards using the US General Social Survey-Quality of Work-Life (GSS-QWL) data (2002–2018; N = 7,100 workers). Results Five methodological weaknesses in existing JEMs of work organization hazards using self-report data were identified: having only two axes (hazard and occupation), using psychometrically weak items and scales, including scales having little interoccupational variability, unresolved optimal minimum numbers of subjects per occupation, and low accessibility. The methodological weaknesses were successfully addressed in the proposed research protocol. Conclusion The work organization JEM to be developed will significantly facilitate and strengthen occupational epidemiological studies on work organization hazards and major health outcomes, improve national and occupational surveillance of work organization hazards, and promote interventions for a healthy work environment in the US.

Constructing and validating an Occupational Mechanical Job Exposure Index based on five Norwegian nationwide Surveys of Living Conditions on work environment

“…The confidence interval estimates shown in Table 8 , clearly suggests that precision is higher in the 5 wave sample than in the 2 wave sample. As pointed out by Choi [ 30 ] there might be a trade-off between number of subjects in each JEM group and the precision of the estimated exposures: To collapse several occupational groups in order to obtain a higher number of observations, will to some extent result in lower precision. In our material, this is less of a problem since few occupational groups are collapsed and the remaining are rather “clean”, homogeneous groups.…”

Low Job Control and Racial Disparities in Breastfeeding

“…Imprecise measures of job control may have attenuated our results. Also, job exposure matrices specific to female workers may provide more accurate estimates 77 . Future studies could examine whether a gender-specific JEM explains more variation in BF.…”

“…To obtain information about working conditions, we used a JEM built from the General Social Survey–Quality of Worklife Questionnaire. Five waves of the General Social Survey (2002, 2006, 2010, 2014, and 2018) 76 were used to create a JEM for two working conditions: low job control and high physical workload 77 . Physical workload is addressed in our Supplemental Appendix, http://links.lww.com/JOM/B143.…”

“…Five waves of the General Social Survey (2002, 2006, 2010, 2014, and 2018) 76 were used to create a JEM for two working conditions: low job control and high physical workload. 77 Physical workload is addressed in our Supplemental Appendix, http://links.lww. com/JOM/B143.…”

Reliability of O*NET physical exposures between Italian and US databases

“…Job‐exposure matrices (JEMs) are a common means to estimate exposures in epidemiological surveillance studies and to guide selecting priorities for exposure interventions when no other reliable data is available 1,2 . JEMs were originally used to impute environmental exposures for cancer health outcomes and more recently used to impute psychosocial 3,4 and physical exposures 5,6 . JEMs use job titles to assign exposures, with numerical or ordinal values computed from past known exposure data 7 .…”