Evaluation of Exposure Information

Schneider, Thomas; Olsen, Ib; Jørgensen, Ole Have; Lauersen, Bjarne

doi:10.1080/1047322x.1991.10387915

Cited by 28 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We estimated job and time-specific exposures to six agents: lead, SO 2 , arsenic, cadmium, dust, and cobalt, using a modification of the process-based projection of exposure measurements, first described in detail by Esmen [1979] and later further developed by others [Stewart et al, 1986;Dodgson et al, 1987;Yu et al, 1990;Schneider et al, 1991]. The process information gathered in the original Copperhill study [Enterline et al, 1986[Enterline et al, , 1987b was augmented by additional documentation provided by the company and interviews with 49 knowledgeable former Copperhill employees to obtain full details of the processes and process changes over the extended period of the study.…”

Section: Exposure Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mortality patterns among workers exposed to arsenic, cadmium, and other substances in a copper smelter

Marsh¹,

Esmen²,

Buchanich³

et al. 2009

American J Industrial Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our limited evidence of an association between inhaled arsenic exposure and CVD is an exploratory finding not observed in other epidemiology studies of more highly exposed occupational populations. Possible alternative explanations include chance alone and uncontrolled confounding or effect modification by co-exposures or other factors correlated with arsenic exposure and unique to the Copperhill facility.

show abstract

Section: Exposure Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mortality patterns among workers exposed to arsenic, cadmium, and other substances in a copper smelter

Marsh¹,

Esmen²,

Buchanich³

et al. 2009

American J Industrial Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, the models could be used to predict the effect of process changes on particular work environment outcomes before the changes are actually made so that disruptions are minimized. This approach uses methods that have already been developed for retrospective exposure assessment, [Schneider et al, 1991;Quinn et al, 1992] but shifts the emphasis from the past to the evaluation of current or future production processes.…”

Section: Development Of Production Process Evaluation and Predictive mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable production: A proposed strategy for the work environment

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In the future, competitive industries will need to design for environment, health and safety as well as for productivity. Although the new areas of pollution prevention and clean production have evolved to address the design of production processes with concerns for the ambient environment, current pollution prevention models do not include explicit concerns for health, safety, and the work environment. The field of occupational health and safety has much to contribute to improve current pollution prevention approaches and solutions. Methods The application of work environment disciplines will need to be expanded from the conventional focus on “end‐of‐pipe” assessment and solutions, which take the production processes and resulting hazards as a given, to include a new focus on materials selection and process redesign. To make this shift, a new framework called “sustainable production” is proposed. The basic unit of sustainable production is the production process. The framework integrates a focus on the ambient and work environment along with a focus on productivity and the economic viability of the business enterprise in setting production process design parameters. Results By shifting the focus of occupational and environmental health and safety from exposure control to process design, sustainable production reduces the likelihood that concerns for health, safety, and the environment will be seen as antagonistic to productivity and economic development. To move a firm toward sustainable production, occupational health and safety professionals will need to participate in interdisciplinary workplace teams that design and build new production processes and that continuously evaluate and redesign existing processes. Conclusions This new strategy requires an expansion of the role of the occupational health and safety professional to include evaluation and redesign of processes that produce goods and services as well as the conventional evaluation of chemical, physical, and biological agents, work practices, and ergonomics. This expansion of occupational and environmental health and safety requires new research to develop the scientific and public policy basis of sustainable production. Am. J. Ind. Med. 34:297–304, 1998. © 1998 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

show abstract

“…Factors that influence exposure may be associated with the agent itself, but the majority are linked to work content, tasks performed, production, environmental and personal characteristics (Woskie et al, 1995;Burstyn and Teschke, 1999). More detailed lists of determinants are presented elsewhere for inhalation (Schneider et al, 1991) and dermal exposure . In general, uncertainty issues related to analytical and sampling error make a minor contribution to the observed variability in exposure (Nicas et al, 1991).…”

Section: Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Tools for regulatory assessment of occupational exposure: development and challenges

Tielemans

Warren

Schneider

et al. 2007

J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of CHemicals) requires improved exposure models that can be incorporated into screening tools and refined assessment tools. These are referred to as tier 1 and 2 models, respectively. There are a number of candidate in tier 1 models that could be used with REACH. Tier 2 models, producing robust and realistic exposure assessments, are currently not available. A research programme is proposed in this paper that will result in a new, advanced exposure assessment tool for REACH. In addition, issues related to variability and uncertainty are discussed briefly, and some examples of tier 1 screening tools are presented. The proposed framework for the tier 2 tool is based on a Bayesian approach, and makes full use of mechanistically modelled estimates and any relevant measurements of exposure. The new approach will preclude the necessity to conduct of case-by-case exposure measurements for each chemical and scenario, since the system will allow for the use of analogous exposure data from relatively comparable scenarios. The development of the new approach requires substantial effort in the area of mechanistic modelling, database development and Bayesian statistical techniques. In this paper, the data gaps and areas for future research are identified to help realise and further improve this type of approach within REACH. A structured data collection and storage system is a central element of the research programme and the availability of this type of tool may also facilitate the sharing of exposure data down and up the supply chain. In addition, new data that are stored according to the proposed structure could enable the validation of any exposure model and thus this programme enhances the exposure assessment field as a whole.

show abstract

Evaluation of Exposure Information

Cited by 28 publications

References 21 publications

Mortality patterns among workers exposed to arsenic, cadmium, and other substances in a copper smelter

Mortality patterns among workers exposed to arsenic, cadmium, and other substances in a copper smelter

Sustainable production: A proposed strategy for the work environment

Tools for regulatory assessment of occupational exposure: development and challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About