建立一个框架,对环境和职业风险因素暴露的普遍性进行系统审查。

Frank Pega, Natalie C Momen, Lisa Bero, Paul Whaley
{"title":"建立一个框架,对环境和职业风险因素暴露的普遍性进行系统审查。","authors":"Frank Pega, Natalie C Momen, Lisa Bero, Paul Whaley","doi":"10.1186/s12940-022-00878-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Exposure prevalence studies (as here defined) record the prevalence of exposure to environmental and occupational risk factors to human health. Applying systematic review methods to the synthesis of these studies would improve the rigour and transparency of normative products produced based on this evidence (e.g., exposure prevalence estimates). However, a dedicated framework, including standard methods and tools, for systematically reviewing exposure prevalence studies has yet to be created. We describe the need for this framework and progress made towards it through a series of such systematic reviews that the World Health Organization and the International Labour Organization conducted for their WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury (WHO/ILO Joint Estimates).We explain that existing systematic review frameworks for environmental and occupational health cannot be directly applied for the generation of exposure prevalence estimates because they seek to synthesise different types of evidence (e.g., intervention or exposure effects on health) for different purposes (e.g., identify intervention effectiveness or exposure toxicity or carcinogenicity). Concepts unique to exposure prevalence studies (e.g., \"expected heterogeneity\": the real, non-spurious variability in exposure prevalence due to exposure changes over space and/or time) also require new assessment methods. A framework for systematic reviews of prevalence of environmental and occupational exposures requires adaptation of existing methods (e.g., a standard protocol) and development of new tools or approaches (e.g., for assessing risk of bias and certainty of a body of evidence, including exploration of expected heterogeneity).As part of the series of systematic reviews for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates, the World Health Organization collaborating with partners has created a preliminary framework for systematic reviews of prevalence studies of exposures to occupational risk factors. This included development of protocol templates, data extraction templates, a risk of bias assessment tool, and an approach for assessing certainty of evidence in these studies. Further attention and efforts are warranted from scientific and policy communities, especially exposure scientists and policy makers, to establish a standard framework for comprehensive and transparent systematic reviews of studies estimating prevalence of exposure to environmental and occupational risk factors, to improve estimates, risk assessments and guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":520610,"journal":{"name":"Environmental health : a global access science source","volume":" ","pages":"64"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9258093/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Towards a framework for systematic reviews of the prevalence of exposure to environmental and occupational risk factors.\",\"authors\":\"Frank Pega, Natalie C Momen, Lisa Bero, Paul Whaley\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12940-022-00878-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Exposure prevalence studies (as here defined) record the prevalence of exposure to environmental and occupational risk factors to human health. Applying systematic review methods to the synthesis of these studies would improve the rigour and transparency of normative products produced based on this evidence (e.g., exposure prevalence estimates). However, a dedicated framework, including standard methods and tools, for systematically reviewing exposure prevalence studies has yet to be created. We describe the need for this framework and progress made towards it through a series of such systematic reviews that the World Health Organization and the International Labour Organization conducted for their WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury (WHO/ILO Joint Estimates).We explain that existing systematic review frameworks for environmental and occupational health cannot be directly applied for the generation of exposure prevalence estimates because they seek to synthesise different types of evidence (e.g., intervention or exposure effects on health) for different purposes (e.g., identify intervention effectiveness or exposure toxicity or carcinogenicity). Concepts unique to exposure prevalence studies (e.g., \\\"expected heterogeneity\\\": the real, non-spurious variability in exposure prevalence due to exposure changes over space and/or time) also require new assessment methods. A framework for systematic reviews of prevalence of environmental and occupational exposures requires adaptation of existing methods (e.g., a standard protocol) and development of new tools or approaches (e.g., for assessing risk of bias and certainty of a body of evidence, including exploration of expected heterogeneity).As part of the series of systematic reviews for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates, the World Health Organization collaborating with partners has created a preliminary framework for systematic reviews of prevalence studies of exposures to occupational risk factors. This included development of protocol templates, data extraction templates, a risk of bias assessment tool, and an approach for assessing certainty of evidence in these studies. Further attention and efforts are warranted from scientific and policy communities, especially exposure scientists and policy makers, to establish a standard framework for comprehensive and transparent systematic reviews of studies estimating prevalence of exposure to environmental and occupational risk factors, to improve estimates, risk assessments and guidelines.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520610,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental health : a global access science source\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"64\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9258093/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental health : a global access science source\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-022-00878-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental health : a global access science source","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-022-00878-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

暴露流行率研究(按此处定义)记录暴露于环境和职业风险因素对人类健康的流行程度。将系统审查方法应用于这些研究的综合将提高基于这些证据(例如,暴露流行率估计)生产的规范性产品的严谨性和透明度。然而,尚未建立一个专门的框架,包括标准方法和工具,以系统地审查暴露流行研究。我们通过世界卫生组织和国际劳工组织为其世卫组织/国际劳工组织关于与工作有关的疾病和伤害负担的联合估计(世卫组织/国际劳工组织联合估计)进行的一系列此类系统审查,描述了对这一框架的需求以及在这方面取得的进展。我们解释说,现有的环境和职业健康系统审查框架不能直接应用于产生暴露流行估计,因为它们寻求为不同目的(例如,确定干预有效性或暴露毒性或致癌性)综合不同类型的证据(例如,干预或暴露对健康的影响)。暴露流行率研究特有的概念(例如,“预期异质性”:由于暴露随空间和/或时间变化而导致的暴露流行率的真实、非虚假变异性)也需要新的评估方法。对环境和职业暴露的普遍性进行系统审查的框架需要调整现有方法(例如,标准方案)并开发新的工具或方法(例如,评估偏倚风险和证据的确定性,包括探索预期的异质性)。作为对世卫组织/劳工组织联合估计数进行的一系列系统审查的一部分,世界卫生组织与合作伙伴合作建立了一个初步框架,用于对职业风险因素暴露的流行病学研究进行系统审查。这包括制定方案模板、数据提取模板、偏倚风险评估工具和评估这些研究证据确定性的方法。科学和政策界,特别是暴露科学家和决策者,需要进一步关注和努力,建立一个标准框架,对估计环境和职业风险因素暴露流行率的研究进行全面和透明的系统审查,以改进估计、风险评估和指导方针。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Towards a framework for systematic reviews of the prevalence of exposure to environmental and occupational risk factors.

Exposure prevalence studies (as here defined) record the prevalence of exposure to environmental and occupational risk factors to human health. Applying systematic review methods to the synthesis of these studies would improve the rigour and transparency of normative products produced based on this evidence (e.g., exposure prevalence estimates). However, a dedicated framework, including standard methods and tools, for systematically reviewing exposure prevalence studies has yet to be created. We describe the need for this framework and progress made towards it through a series of such systematic reviews that the World Health Organization and the International Labour Organization conducted for their WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury (WHO/ILO Joint Estimates).We explain that existing systematic review frameworks for environmental and occupational health cannot be directly applied for the generation of exposure prevalence estimates because they seek to synthesise different types of evidence (e.g., intervention or exposure effects on health) for different purposes (e.g., identify intervention effectiveness or exposure toxicity or carcinogenicity). Concepts unique to exposure prevalence studies (e.g., "expected heterogeneity": the real, non-spurious variability in exposure prevalence due to exposure changes over space and/or time) also require new assessment methods. A framework for systematic reviews of prevalence of environmental and occupational exposures requires adaptation of existing methods (e.g., a standard protocol) and development of new tools or approaches (e.g., for assessing risk of bias and certainty of a body of evidence, including exploration of expected heterogeneity).As part of the series of systematic reviews for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates, the World Health Organization collaborating with partners has created a preliminary framework for systematic reviews of prevalence studies of exposures to occupational risk factors. This included development of protocol templates, data extraction templates, a risk of bias assessment tool, and an approach for assessing certainty of evidence in these studies. Further attention and efforts are warranted from scientific and policy communities, especially exposure scientists and policy makers, to establish a standard framework for comprehensive and transparent systematic reviews of studies estimating prevalence of exposure to environmental and occupational risk factors, to improve estimates, risk assessments and guidelines.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信