ART, Stoffenmanager, and TRA: a systematic comparison of exposure estimates using the TREXMO translation system

Details

Ressource 1Download: 2018_Savic_ART_post-print.pdf (712.27 [Ko])
State: Public
Version: Author's accepted manuscript
License: Not specified
Serval ID
serval:BIB_D2CE61A00A3E
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
ART, Stoffenmanager, and TRA: a systematic comparison of exposure estimates using the TREXMO translation system
Journal
Annals of Work Exposures and Health
Author(s)
Savic Nenad, Gasic Bojan, Vernez David
ISSN
2398-7316 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
2398-7308
Publication state
Published
Issued date
2018
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
62
Number
1
Pages
72-87
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Publication Status: ppublish
Abstract
Several occupational exposure models are recommended under the EU's REACH legislation. Due to limited availability of high-quality exposure data, their validation is an ongoing process. It was shown, however, that different models may calculate significantly different estimates and thus lead to potentially dangerous conclusions about chemical risk. In this paper, the between-model translation rules defined in TREXMO were used to generate 319000 different in silico exposure situations in ART, Stoffenmanager, and ECETOC TRA v3. The three models' estimates were computed and the correlation and consistency between them were investigated. The best correlated pair was Stoffenmanager-ART (R, 0.52-0.90), whereas the ART-TRA and Stoffenmanager-TRA correlations were either lower (R, 0.36-0.69) or no correlation was found. Consistency varied significantly according to different exposure types (e.g. vapour versus dust) or settings (near-field versus far-field and indoors versus outdoors). The percentages of generated situations for which estimates differed by more than a factor of 100 ranged from 14 to 97%, 37 to 99%, and 1 to 68% for Stoffenmanager-ART, TRA-ART, and TRA-Stoffenmanager, respectively. Overall, the models were more consistent for vapours than for dusts and solids, near-fields than for far-fields, and indoor than for outdoor exposure. Multiple linear regression analyses evidenced the relationship between the models' parameters and the relative differences between the models' predictions. The relative difference can be used to estimate the consistency between the models. Furthermore, the study showed that the tiered approach is not generally applicable to all exposure situations. These findings emphasize the need for a multiple-model approach to assessing critical exposure scenarios under REACH. Moreover, in combination with occupational exposure measurements, they might also be used for future studies to improve prediction accuracy.
Keywords
Algorithms, Environmental Monitoring/methods, Hazardous Substances/analysis, Hazardous Substances/toxicity, Humans, Models, Biological, Occupational Exposure/analysis, Occupational Exposure/statistics & numerical data, Regression Analysis, Risk Assessment/methods, Risk Assessment/standards, ECETOC TRA, Stoffenmanager, TREXMO, advanced REACH tool, consistency, occupational exposure models
Pubmed
Web of science
Create date
13/01/2018 13:50
Last modification date
20/08/2019 16:52
Usage data