Exposure Misclassification in Studies of Agricultural Pesticides

Abstract

Our results demonstrate the importance of collecting type of pesticide formulation and suggest a generic exposure assessment is likely to result in appreciable exposure misclassification for many pesticides.

Epidemiology and etiology of Parkinson’s disease: a review of the evidence

“…When this algorithm was validated against urine concentrations of pesticides, moderate correlations were found with data from field observers, but for self-reported data correlations were low. Results differed by formulation of exposure (granular versus liquid), highlighting the importance of collecting information on type of pesticide [334]. To date (2010), only one study used prospectively assessed biomarkers [329].…”

The non-Hodgkin lymphomas: A review of the epidemiologic literature

“…Study participants are often relied upon to recall the name(s) of specific pesticides used, number of days of specific pesticide application, type of application equipment that was used, use of personal protective devices, number of acres farmed and typical personal hygiene practice. 164,165 An analysis of biological marker data from participants in the Farm Family Exposure Study showed that internal exposure levels varied by specific type of chemical and the degree of direct contact with the application process. 166 Studies with inferred exposure based on farming occupations or on exposure defined generally as ''pesticides'' or ''herbicides'' are less informative than studies that evaluate specific chemicals.…”

A review of pesticide exposure and cancer incidence in the agricultural health study cohort

“…In the AHS, self-reported LDs and IWLDs of pesticide exposure are used as the primary exposure measures. To date, four studies have examined the validity of the intensityweighted exposure algorithm used in the AHS (Acquavella et al 2006;Coble et al 2005;Thomas et al 2009). Two of these studies were conducted using data from the Pesticide Exposure Assessment Study conducted in Canada (Acquavella et al 2006;Coble et al 2005), and the remaining two studies were conducted using members of the AHS cohort Thomas et al 2009).…”

“…To date, four studies have examined the validity of the intensityweighted exposure algorithm used in the AHS (Acquavella et al 2006;Coble et al 2005;Thomas et al 2009). Two of these studies were conducted using data from the Pesticide Exposure Assessment Study conducted in Canada (Acquavella et al 2006;Coble et al 2005), and the remaining two studies were conducted using members of the AHS cohort Thomas et al 2009). In general, validation studies have observed low to moderate correlations between exposure intensity algorithm scores and urinary biomarkers of 2,4-D, 4-chloro-2-methylphenoxyacetic acid (MCPA), captan, glyphosate, and chlorpyrifos (Acquavella et al 2006;Coble et al 2005;Thomas et al 2009).…”