Open Access Article
This Open Access Article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licence
Correction: Statistical modeling of crystalline silica exposure by trade in the construction industry using a database compiled from the literature†
Jean-François
Sauvé
a,
Charles
Beaudry
a,
Denis
Bégin
a,
Chantal
Dion
ab,
Michel
Gérin
ac and
Jérôme
Lavoué
*ad
aUniversité de Montréal, Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, P.O. Box 6128, Main Station, Montréal, QC, Canada H3C 3J7. E-mail: jerome.lavoue@umontreal.ca; Fax: +1-514-412-7106; Tel: +1-514-890-8000 #15913
bInstitut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail (IRSST), Canada
cInstitut de recherche en santé publique de l'Université de Montréal (IRSPUM), Canada
dUniversity of Montreal Hospital Research Centre (CRCHUM), 3875 rue St-Urbain, 3ème étage, suite 316, Montréal, QC, Canada H2W 1V1
First published on 24th October 2014
Abstract
Correction for ‘Statistical modeling of crystalline silica exposure by trade in the construction industry using a database compiled from the literature’ by Jean-François Sauvé et al., J. Environ. Monit., 2012, 14, 2512–2520.
It has come to our attention that there was an error in the computation of the averaged predictions in this article. The value of the multiplicative factor associated with the “Workspace: Controls – Interior: With controls” interaction term, as found in ESI Tables S1 and S2,† should be 1/4 rather than 1/2. The authors have re-done the computations and a comparison of the revised results with those presented in Table 6 of the article is shown below. In all but three cases, the revised results were identical to those published. For the three instances where they differed, the changes were mainly attributable to the effect of rounding.
| Trade | Geometric mean (mg m−3) | Group exceedance fraction (Θ) by OEL | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revised | Published | ACGIH – 0.025 mg m−3 | Québec – 0.1 mg m−3 | |||
| Revised | Published | Revised | Published | |||
| Note: “Published” refers to the data presented in Table 6 of the article. | ||||||
| Drilling rig operator | 0.238 | 0.238 | 91% | 91% | 70% | 70% |
| Tunnel construction worker | 0.224 | 0.224 | 91% | 91% | 69% | 69% |
| Roofer | 0.154 | 0.154 | 86% | 86% | 60% | 60% |
| Cement grinder/concrete finisher | 0.134 | 0.134 | 85% | 85% | 57% | 57% |
| Bricklayer/stone mason | 0.101 | 0.100 | 80% | 80% | 50% | 50% |
| Skilled labour 2 | 0.061 | 0.061 | 71% | 71% | 38% | 38% |
| Skilled labour 1 | 0.059 | 0.059 | 70% | 70% | 38% | 37% |
| Unskilled labour | 0.056 | 0.056 | 69% | 69% | 36% | 36% |
| Foreman | 0.048 | 0.048 | 66% | 65% | 33% | 33% |
| Heavy equipment operator | 0.045 | 0.045 | 64% | 64% | 31% | 31% |
| Other | 0.022 | 0.022 | 47% | 47% | 18% | 18% |
| All trades | 0.082 | 0.082 | 76% | 76% | 45% | 45% |
In addition, the authors have identified errors in the lower bound of the confidence intervals of the predicted geometric mean exposure for the “Drilling rig operator” and “Tunnel construction worker” trades presented in Fig. 1. The point estimates presented for these categories were correct. A comparison of the revised figure – with corrected confidence intervals, along with the revised estimates from the corrected predictions – with the one originally published is presented below.
Revised Fig. 1:
Fig. 1 as published in the article:
The changes stemming from correcting these errors are almost negligible, and do not affect in any way the conclusions of the paper.
The Royal Society of Chemistry apologises for these errors and any consequent inconvenience to authors and readers.
Footnote |
| † Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available. See DOI: 10.1039/c4em90040e |
| This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2014 |