Data Collection issues: Measurement of multi-pollutant and multi-pathway exposures in a probability-based sample of children: practical strategies for effective field studies

Abstract

The purpose of this manuscript is to describe the practical strategies developed for the implementation of the Minnesota Children's Pesticide Exposure Study ( MNCPES ) , which is one of the first probability -based samples of multi -pathway and multi -pesticide exposures in children. The primary objective of MNCPES was to characterize children's exposure to selected pesticides through a combination of questionnaires, personal exposure measurements ( i.e., air, duplicate diet, hand rinse ) , and complementary monitoring of biological samples ( i.e., pesticide metabolites in urine ) , environmental samples ( i.e., residential indoor / outdoor air, drinking water, dust on residential surfaces, soil ) , and children's activity patterns. A cross -sectional design employing a stratified random sample was used to identify homes with age -eligible children and screen residences to facilitate oversampling of households with higher potential exposures. Numerous techniques were employed in the study, including in -person contact by locally based interviewers, brief and highly focused home visits, graduated subject incentives, and training of parents and children to assist in sample collection. It is not feasible to quantify increases in rates of subject recruitment, retention, or compliance that resulted from the techniques employed in this study. Nevertheless, results indicate that the total package of implemented procedures was instrumental in obtaining a high percentage of valid samples for targeted households and environmental media. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology ( 2000 ) 10, 650 ± 661.

Comparison of recruitment, retention, and compliance results for three children's exposure monitoring studies

“…Because exposure-monitoring studies tend to be burdensome for participants and offer no therapeutic benefit, the degree to which these activities are successful has a direct bearing on whether a particular exposure-monitoring study achieves its research objectives (Callahan et al, 1995). Although some relevant information related to clinical trials, intervention research, and surveys is available (Pletsch et al, 1995;Fitzgibbon et al, 1998;Julion and Gross, 2000;Janson et al, 2001;Preloran et al, 2001;Pressel et al, 2001;Sorkness et al, 2001), relatively little has been published on recruitment, retention, and compliance results for children's exposure-monitoring studies (Mitchell et al, 1997;Senturia et al, 1998;Adgate et al, 2000;Needham and Sexton, 2000b;Sexton et al, 2000Sexton et al, , 2003.…”

“…The validity of results depends on, among other things, recruitment of research subjects, retention of subjects throughout the duration of the study, and subjects' compliance with monitoring protocols (Callahan et al, 1995;Mitchell et al, 1997;Senturia et al, 1998;Adgate et al, 2000;Needham and Sexton, 2000b;Sexton et al, 2003). Despite the widely recognized importance of these issues, relatively little has been published on recruiting, retaining, and monitoring children in the context of environmental exposure investigations, especially children from low-income minority communities.…”

Personal, Indoor, and Outdoor VOC Exposures in a Probability Sample of Children

“…A detailed description of the MNCPES study design, eligibility criteria, sample selection, field sampling methods, and the development and application of statistical weights has been published (Adgate et al, 2000a;Quackenboss et al, 2000), and is briefly summarized here. During the study a probability sample of households with children was obtained through a systematic process occurring over three phases: identification, household screening, and intensive monitoring.…”

Multimedia measurements and activity patterns in an observational pilot study of nine young children

“…Although recent research efforts have collected much needed data to improve our understanding of the potential exposures of young children in their homes, child care centers, and other environments (Zartarian et al, 1995(Zartarian et al, , 1997(Zartarian et al, , 1998Bradman et al, 1997Bradman et al, , 2007Byrne et al, 1998;Gurunathan et al, 1998;Landrigan et al, 1999;Adgate et al, 2000Adgate et al, , 2001Fenske et al, 2000bFenske et al, , 2002Freeman et al, 2001;Lu et al, 2001;MacIntosh et al, 2001;Pang et al, 2002;Clayton et al, 2003;Curl et al, 2003;Duggan et al, 2003;Shalat et al, 2003;Wilson et al, 2003Wilson et al, , 2004Hore et al, 2005;Morgan et al, 2005;Perera et al, 2006), it is not clear what factors most influence a child's potential exposure to pesticides.…”