1. Validation of self-reported occupational noise exposure in participants of a French case–control study on acoustic neuroma
- Author
-
Joachim Schüz, Brigitte Schlehofer, Martine Hours, Klaus Schlaefer, Amelie Massardier-Pilonchery, Isabelle Deltour, Centre International de Recherche contre le Cancer - International Agency for Research on Cancer (CIRC - IARC), Organisation Mondiale de la Santé / World Health Organization Office (OMS / WHO), Unité Mixte de Recherche Epidémiologique et de Surveillance Transport Travail Environnement (UMRESTTE UMR_T9405), Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 (UCBL), Université de Lyon-Université de Lyon-Université Gustave Eiffel, Unit of Environmental Epidemiology, and German Cancer Research Centre
- Subjects
Adult ,Male ,medicine.medical_specialty ,EXPERT ASSESSMENT ,Population ,Acoustic neuroma ,Audiology ,Occupational noise exposure ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Occupational Exposure ,Recall bias ,Positive predicative value ,otorhinolaryngologic diseases ,Humans ,Medicine ,030212 general & internal medicine ,education ,CASE-CONTROL STUDY ,education.field_of_study ,business.industry ,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health ,Case-control study ,Neuroma, Acoustic ,Odds ratio ,Middle Aged ,DATA VALIDITY ,medicine.disease ,030210 environmental & occupational health ,Noise ,Case-Control Studies ,Noise, Occupational ,Female ,[SDV.SPEE]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Santé publique et épidémiologie ,France ,Self Report ,sense organs ,business ,psychological phenomena and processes - Abstract
To validate self-reported occupational loud noise exposure against expert evaluation of noise levels in a French case–control study on acoustic neuroma and to estimate the impact of exposure misclassification on risk estimation. Noise levels were evaluated in 1006 jobs held by 111 cases and 217 population controls by an expert. Case–control differences in self-reporting were analyzed with logistic models. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and observed agreement of the self-reports were computed relative to the expert evaluation. They were used to calibrate the odds ratio (OR) between lifetime ever occupational loud noise exposure and the risk of acoustic neuroma, without adjustment for measurement error of the expert assessments. Cases reported noise levels in individual jobs closer to the expert assessment than controls, but the case–control difference was small for lifetime exposures. For expert-rated exposure of 80 dB(A), reporting of individual jobs by cases was more sensitive (54% in cases, 37% in controls), whereas specificity (91% in cases, 93% in controls) and observed agreement (82% in cases, 81% in controls) were similar. When lifetime exposure was considered, sensitivity increased (76% in cases, 65% in controls), while cases specificity decreased (84%). When these values were used to calibrate self-reports for exposure misclassification compared to expert evaluation at 80 dB(A), the crude OR of 1.7 was reduced to 1.3. Despite the relatively accurate reporting of loud noise, the impact of the calibration on the OR was non-negligible.
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF