Subscribe: Annals of Occupational Hygiene - Advance Access
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade B rated
Language: English
bystander resident  exposures  job  life stress  life  psychosocial work  stress  women  work exposures  work life  work stress  work 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Annals of Occupational Hygiene - Advance Access

Annals of Work Exposures and Health Advance Access

Published: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT

Last Build Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 01:56:09 GMT


Improvements in Modelling Bystander and Resident Exposure to Pesticide Spray Drift: Investigations into New Approaches for Characterizing the ‘Collection Efficiency’ of the Human Body

Sat, 17 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT

The BREAM (Bystander and Resident Exposure Assessment Model) (Kennedy et al. in BREAM: A probabilistic bystander and resident exposure assessment model of spray drift from an agricultural boom sprayer. Comput Electron Agric 2012;88:63–71) for bystander and resident exposure to spray drift from boom sprayers has recently been incorporated into the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) guidance for determining non-dietary exposures of humans to plant protection products. The component of BREAM, which relates airborne spray concentrations to bystander and resident dermal exposure, has been reviewed to identify whether it is possible to improve this and its description of variability captured in the model. Two approaches have been explored: a more rigorous statistical analysis of the empirical data and a semi-mechanistic model based on established studies combined with new data obtained in a wind tunnel. A statistical comparison between field data and model outputs was used to determine which approach gave the better prediction of exposures. The semi-mechanistic approach gave the better prediction of experimental data and resulted in a reduction in the proposed regulatory values for the 75th and 95th percentiles of the exposure distribution.

Gender/Sex Differences in the Relationship between Psychosocial Work Exposures and Work and Life Stress

Thu, 15 Mar 2018 00:00:00 GMT

Stress is an important factor affecting the health of working population. While work exposures are determinants of levels of work and life stress, we do not know whether similar or different exposures are related to stress levels for men and women. This study aimed to formally examine male/female differences in the relationships between psychosocial work exposures and work and life stress in a representative sample of Canadian labour market participants.
We used data from 2012 cycle of the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS), a representative population-based survey conducted by Statistics Canada. The sample was restricted to employed labour force participants working 15+ hours per week (N = 8328, 48% female). To examine the relationship between work exposures and work and life stress, we conducted path analyses. Psychosocial work exposures included social support, job insecurity, job control, and job strain. Differences between estimates for men and women were explored using multigroup analyses, constraining paths between male and female models to be equivalent and examining the impact on change in model fit.
Male/female differences were observed in the relationships between supervisor support and work stress levels as well as between job control, job insecurity, job strain, and life stress levels. Higher levels of supervisor support at work were associated with lower work stress among women, but not among men. Low job control had a direct protective effect on life stress for men but not for women, while high job strain had a direct adverse effect on life stress among women but not among men. Higher job insecurity was more strongly associated with higher life stress among men compared with women. The relationship between work stress and life stress was similar among men and women.
The findings of this study suggest that the relationships between psychosocial exposures and work and life stress differ for men and women. Our study also raised important questions about which work exposures are considered when assessing work stress, with level of job control not related to work stress but associated with levels of life stress among men.
Our study highlights the role of psychosocial work environment for both work and life stress and suggests differences in the importance of specific psychosocial work dimensions for feelings of stress among men and women, and for work stress versus life stress. Future study designs should ensure that measures are included to better disentangle the relative contribution of social and biological factors in explaining these differences among men and women.