Zhou L, Xue P, Zhang Y, Wei F, Zhou J, Wang S, Hu Y, Lou X, Zou H. Occupational health risk assessment methods in China: A scoping review.
Front Public Health 2022;
10:1035996. [PMID:
36466494 PMCID:
PMC9714297 DOI:
10.3389/fpubh.2022.1035996]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/03/2022] [Accepted: 11/02/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Background
Over the decades, many assessment methods have been developed around the world and used for occupational health risk assessment (OHRA). This scoping review integrated the literature on methodological studies of OHRA in China and aimed to identifies the research hot-spots and methodological research perspectives on OHRA in China.
Methods
A scoping review of literature was undertaken to explore the research progress on OHRA methods in China. Focusing on OHRA methods, the authors systematically searched Chinese and English databases and relevant guideline websites from the date of establishment to June 30, 2022. Databases included Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, the China National Knowledge Internet, WanFang Database. Some other websites were also searched to obtain gray literature. The extracted information included the author, year, region of first author, the target industry, risk assessment model, study type, the main results and conclusions.
Results
Finally, 145 of 9,081 studies were included in this review. There were 108 applied studies, 30 comparative studies and 7 optimization studies on OHRA in China. The OHRA methods studied included: (1) qualitative methods such as Romanian model, Australian model, International Council on Mining and Metals model, and Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Essentials; (2) quantitative methods such as the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency inhalation risk assessment model, Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic, and Monte Carlo simulation; (3) semi-quantitative methods such as Singapore model, Fuzzy mathematical risk assessment model, Likelihood Exposure Consequence method and Occupational Hazard Risk Index assessment method; (4) comprehensive method (Chinese OHRA standard GBZ/T 298-2017). Each of the OHRA methods had its own strengths and limitations. In order to improve the applicability of OHRA methods, some of them have been optimized by researchers.
Conclusions
There is a wide range of OHRA methods studied in China, including applied, comparative, and optimization studies. Their applicability needs to be further tested through further application in different industries. Furthermore, quantitative comparative studies, optimization studies, and modeling studies are also needed.
Collapse