Methods to Explore Uncertainty and Bias Introduced by Job Exposure Matrices.

Job exposure matrices (JEMs) are used to measure exposures based on information about particular jobs and tasks. JEMs are especially useful when individual exposure data cannot be obtained. Nonetheless, there may be other workplace exposures associated with the study disease that are not measured in available JEMs. When these exposures are also associated with the exposures measured in the JEM, biases due to uncontrolled confounding will be introduced. Furthermore, individual exposures differ from JEM measurements due to differences in job conditions and worker practices. Uncertainty may also be present at the assessor level since exposure information for each job may be imprecise or incomplete. Assigning individuals a fixed exposure determined by the JEM ignores these uncertainty sources. We examine the uncertainty displayed by bias analyses in a study of occupational electric shocks, occupational magnetic fields, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

Developing a job-exposure matrix with exposure uncertainty from expert elicitation and data modeling.

Job exposure matrices (JEMs) are tools used to classify exposures for job titles based on general job tasks in the absence of individual level data. However, exposure uncertainty due to variations in worker practices, job conditions, and the quality of data has never been quantified systematically in a JEM. We describe a methodology for creating a JEM which defines occupational exposures on a continuous scale and utilizes elicitation methods to quantify exposure uncertainty by assigning exposures probability distributions with parameters determined through expert involvement. Experts use their knowledge to develop mathematical models using related exposure surrogate data in the absence of available occupational level data and to adjust model output against other similar occupations. Formal expert elicitation methods provided a consistent, efficient process to incorporate expert judgment into a large, consensus-based JEM. A population-based electric shock JEM was created using these methods, allowing for transparent estimates of exposure.

Job exposure matrix for electric shock risks with their uncertainties.

We present an update to an electric shock job exposure matrix (JEM) that assigned ordinal electric shocks exposure for 501 occupational titles based on electric shocks and electrocutions from two available data sources and expert judgment. Using formal expert elicitation and starting with data on electric injury, we arrive at a consensus-based JEM. In our new JEM, we quantify exposures by adding three new dimensions: (1) the elicited median proportion; (2) the elicited 25th percentile; and (3) and the elicited 75th percentile of those experiencing occupational electric shocks in a working lifetime. We construct the relative interquartile range (rIQR) based on uncertainty interval and the median. Finally, we describe overall results, highlight examples demonstrating the impact of cut point selection on exposure assignment, and evaluate potential impacts of such selection on epidemiologic studies of the electric work environment. In conclusion, novel methods allowed for consistent exposure estimates that move from qualitative to quantitative measures in this population-based JEM. Overlapping ranges of median exposure in various categories reflect our limited knowledge about this exposure.