Citation

Ostry AS, Marion SA, Demers PA, Hershler R, Kelly S, Teschke K, Mustard CA, Hertzman C. Scand. J. Work Environ. Health 2001; 27(1): 70-75.

Affiliation

Department of Health Care and Epidemiology, Vancouver, Canada. ostry@interchange.ubc.ca

Copyright

(Copyright © 2001, Finland Institute of Occupational Health)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

11266150

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study tested the reliability and validity of industry- and mill-level expert methods for measuring psychosocial work conditions in British Columbia sawmills using the demand-control model. METHODS: In the industry-level method 4 sawmill job evaluators estimated psychosocial work conditions at a generic sawmill. In the mill-level method panels of experienced sawmill workers estimated psychosocial work conditions at 3 sawmills. Scores for psychosocial work conditions were developed using both expert methods and applied to job titles in a sawmill worker database containing self-reported health status and heart disease. The interrater reliability and the concurrent and predictive validity of the expert rater methods were assessed. RESULTS: The interrater reliability and concurrent reliability were higher for the mill-level method than for the industry-level method. For all the psychosocial variables the reliability for the mill-level method was greater than 0.90. The predictive validity results were inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: The greater reliability and concurrent validity of the mill-level method indicates that panels of experienced workers should be considered as potential experts in future studies measuring psychosocial work conditions.

Language: en