Literature DB >> 10140862

A comparison of multiple indicators--observations, supervisor report, and self-report as measures of workers' hearing protection use.

S L Lusk1, D L Ronis, L M Baer.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare multiple indicators of behavior and identify the most viable measure of blue-collar workers' use of hearing protection. Three measures of use were employed: observations, supervisor report, and self-report. Supervisor report was highly discrepant from both self-report and observed use; self-report and observations were highly correlated, and discrepancies between the two were slight. These results suggest that, for this type of measurement, self-report is an appropriate measure and may be the best choice when time and monetary resources restrict measurement to one indicator.

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 10140862     DOI: 10.1177/016327879501800104

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eval Health Prof        ISSN: 0163-2787            Impact factor:   2.651


  13 in total

1.  Efficacy of a computer-based hearing test and tailored hearing protection intervention.

Authors:  OiSaeng Hong; David L Ronis; Sally L Lusk; Gwang-Soog Kee
Journal:  Int J Behav Med       Date:  2006

2.  Towards a general framework for including noise impacts in LCA.

Authors:  Stefano Cucurachi; Reinout Heijungs; Katrin Ohlau
Journal:  Int J Life Cycle Assess       Date:  2012-01-11       Impact factor: 4.141

3.  Safety climate, hearing climate and hearing protection device use among transportation road maintainers.

Authors:  Jennifer M Cavallari; Katrina A Burch; Jeffrey Hanrahan; Jennifer L Garza; Alicia G Dugan
Journal:  Am J Ind Med       Date:  2019-05-19       Impact factor: 2.214

4.  Case-crossover studies of occupational trauma: methodological caveats.

Authors:  G S Sorock; D A Lombardi; C L Gabel; G S Smith; M A Mittleman
Journal:  Inj Prev       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 2.399

5.  Social Desirability Bias in Self-Reporting of Hearing Protector Use among Farm Operators.

Authors:  Marjorie C McCullagh; Marie-Anne Rosemberg
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2015-07-23

6.  Prevalence of hearing protection device non-use among noise-exposed US workers in 2007 and 2014.

Authors:  Deirdre R Green; Elizabeth A Masterson; Christa L Themann
Journal:  Am J Ind Med       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 3.079

7.  Indicators of hearing protection use: self-report and researcher observation.

Authors:  Stephanie C Griffin; Richard Neitzel; William E Daniell; Noah S Seixas
Journal:  J Occup Environ Hyg       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 2.155

8.  Effects of interventions on use of hearing protectors among farm operators: A randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Marjorie C McCullagh; Tanima Banerjee; Michael A Cohen; James J Yang
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 2.117

9.  Protocol of a test of hearing health education programs for farm and rural youth.

Authors:  Marjorie C McCullagh; Tanima Banerjee; James Yang
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2015-10-16       Impact factor: 3.295

10.  Study protocol: a cluster randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of a multi-pronged behavioural intervention to improve use of personal protective equipment among migrant workers exposed to organic solvents in small and medium-sized enterprises.

Authors:  Wen Chen; Tongyang Li; Guanyang Zou; Xudong Li; Leiyu Shi; Shanshan Feng; Jingrong Shi; Fangjing Zhou; Siqi Han; Li Ling
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2016-07-16       Impact factor: 3.295

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.