车间空气中苯浓度三种估算方法的比较  

Comparing three methods of estimating concentration of worksite benzene

作　　者：何永华[1] 苗丽壮[1] 傅华[1] 

机构地区：[1]复旦大学公共卫生学院预防医学教研室,上海200032

出　　处：《中华劳动卫生职业病杂志》2005年第1期9-11,共3页Chinese Journal of Industrial Hygiene and Occupational Diseases

摘　　要：目的估算车间空气中苯气溶胶浓度并检验各评估方法的正确性。方法用专家-参考文献法、BAYES统计推断法、专家-测量资料法分别估算了某橡胶厂搪浆车间、成型车间空气中苯的浓度。以现场测量值为标准,检验各种方法评估结果的正确性。结果专家-参考文献法、BAYES统计推断法、专家-测量资料法的对搪浆车间苯浓度评估的几何均数分别为100.0、16.9、33.2mg/m3,成型车间分别为100、156、115mg/m3。专家-参考文献法对搪浆车间的评估结果与检验样本均数的差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),其余结果与检验样本的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论BAYES统计推断法和专家-测量资料法评估方法正确性较好;如果没有测定资料,可采用专家-参考文献评估法,但主观性较强。Objective benzene;Air pollution;Risk assessment in the air of workshop and validate the methods. Methods Expert-reference,BAYES statistics and expert-measurement were separately used to estimate benzene concentration in a slurry-applying workshop and modeling workshop of a rubber factory.The estimations were compared with current newly monitored data. Results The estimated averages of expert-reference,BAYES statistics and expert-measurement were 100.0,16.9,33.2 mg/m3 respectively for the slurry-applying workshop and 100,156,115 mg/m3 for the modeling workshop.No significant difference was observed between the estimations and validating sample except to that of the expert-reference for the former. Conclusion BAYES statistics and expert-measurement were precise and expert-reference was candidate if no measurements in spite of its subjectivity.

关 键 词：MG/M^3 专家 几何均数 车间 评估结果 检验 统计学 推断 资料 主观性 

分 类 号：R134[医药卫生—劳动卫生]