Linked Life Data

10772616

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/10772616

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
1
pubmed:dateCreated
2000-5-4
pubmed:abstractText
A framework for evaluating passive or active industrial hygiene air sampling monitors on a cost-effectiveness basis is described. Five passive monitors and one active monitor (charcoal tube with pump) were compared in several hypothetical scenarios. Using certain assumptions regarding method validation costs, sampling equipment costs, and labor costs, both a per sample cost and a total annual cost were calculated for each type of sampling monitor as a function of total samples taken per year. The results of this study indicate that even when the additional expense of full validation of the passive sampling monitor is required, these monitors are more cost-effective than active monitors. A specific type of passive monitor utilizing replaceable capsules is the most cost-effective when more than 500 samples per year are taken.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:issn
1529-8663
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
61
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
64-8
pubmed:dateRevised
2006-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:articleTitle
Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of various passive monitors and active monitors for industrial hygiene sampling.
pubmed:affiliation
Department of Environmental Health, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle 98195-7234, USA.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't