Suchergebnisse

For many policy analyses, including but not limited to cumulative risk assessments, it is important to characterize the individual and joint health effects of multiple stressors. With an increasing focus on psychosocial and other nonchemical stressors, this often includes epidemiological meta‐analysis. Meta‐analysis has limitations if epidemiological studies do not include all of the stressors of interest or do not provide multivariable outputs in a format necessary for risk assessment. Given these limitations, novel analytical methods are often needed to synthesize the published literature or to build upon available evidence. In this article, we discuss three recent case studies that highlight the strengths and limitations of meta‐analytic approaches and other research synthesis techniques for human health risk assessment applications. First, a literature‐based meta‐analysis within a risk assessment context informed the design of a new epidemiological investigation of the differential toxicity of fine particulate matter constituents. Second, a literature synthesis for an effects‐based cumulative risk assessment of hypertension risk factors led to a decision to develop new epidemiological associations using structural equation modeling. Third, discrete event simulation modeling was used to simulate the impact of changes in the built environment on environmental exposures and associated asthma outcomes, linking literature meta‐analyses for key associations with a simulation model to synthesize all of the model components. These case studies emphasize the importance of conducting epidemiology with a risk assessment application in mind, the need for interdisciplinary collaboration, and the value of advanced analytical methods to synthesize epidemiological and other evidence for risk assessment applications.

Abstract
Take-home exposures occur when workers accidentally bring workplace contaminants home. Regular job responsibilities may expose construction workers to lead, which extends to their households via the take-home pathway. The present study aimed to develop and evaluate 2 educational sessions addressing take-home lead exposure tailored to construction workers and their families. Educational materials on take-home lead exposure and prevention strategies were designed following guidance from US government institutions and experts on construction work, lead exposure, and educational interventions. The educational materials were pilot-tested with construction workers and their family members during in-person or online sessions in English or Spanish. Changes in knowledge of take-home lead exposure were assessed through pre- and post-testing and open-ended feedback was collected from both participants and session facilitators. The study sample comprised 44 participants, including 33 workers and 11 family members. Among all participants, 81% were male, 46% were Hispanic or Latino, and the average age was 29 years. Post-test scores (µ = 93%, SD = 10%) were higher than pre-test scores (µ = 82%, SD = 19%), and younger participants (<30 years) were more likely to have a lower pre-test score compared to older participants (≥30 years). Overall, feedback from participants and facilitators was positive, indicating appropriate duration, appealing visuals, and ease of engagement through the training activities. Effective public health education for lead-exposed construction workers and their families is needed to reduce lead exposure disparities, especially among children of workers. Interventions must recognize that take-home exposures are not isolated to occupational or home environments.