NOTE: This item is not available outside the Texas A&M University network. Texas A&M affiliated users who are off campus can access the item through Ezproxy authentication or by using TAMU VPN. Non-affiliated individuals should request a copy through their local library's interlibrary loan service.
Review and validation of exposure assessment methods
|dc.description||Due to the character of the original source materials and the nature of batch digitization, quality control issues may be present in this document. Please report any quality issues you encounter to firstname.lastname@example.org, referencing the URI of the item.||en_US|
|dc.description||Includes bibliographical references (leaves 65-70).||en_US|
|dc.description||Issued also on microfiche from Lange Micrographics.||en_US|
|dc.description.abstract||The purpose of this research is twofold, to standardize and to validate exposure assessment methods. First, the attempt is made to standardize the manner in which exposure assessment methods are developed. Literature on the subject is reviewed and seven common elements discovered to be common are discussed. The seven elements are causative agents, exposure groups, exposure-modifying parameters, industrial hygiene measurement data, misclassification issues, validation issues, and reliability issues. It is believed that thinking in terms of these elements will yield more consistent and complete exposure assessment models. Three types of exposure estimation methods are reviewed in this form. These methods are selected because they are the most thorough and represent the most frequently used and referenced types of estimation strategies: the statistical model, the deterministic model, and the multiplicative model. Second, the paper reports on an attempt to validate a semiquantitative exposure assessment model against industrial hygiene data collected from employees of one firm in the maritime industry. The set of data contains 440 samples with 75 percent of them censored by the method limit of detection. Methods to calculate an average concentration with nondetectable data are discussed. It is concluded that (1) the model does not predict the data well, (2) the industrial hygiene data does not properly fit the tails of a lognormal distribution, and (3) that average exposure to benzene in the (un)loading of petrochemicals from tankers is decidedly below exposure limits.||en_US|
|dc.publisher||Texas A&M University||en_US|
|dc.rights||This thesis was part of a retrospective digitization project authorized by the Texas A&M University Libraries in 2008. Copyright remains vested with the author(s). It is the user's responsibility to secure permission from the copyright holder(s) for re-use of the work beyond the provision of Fair Use.||en_US|
|dc.subject||Major industrial hygiene.||en_US|
|dc.title||Review and validation of exposure assessment methods||en_US|
Files in this item
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
Digitized Theses and Dissertations (1922–2004) 
Texas A&M University Theses and Dissertations (1922–2004)
Request Open Access
This item and its contents are restricted. If this is your thesis or dissertation, you can make it open-access. This will allow all visitors to view the contents of the thesis.