Introduction Job exposure matrices (JEM) often neglect upstream socioeconomic variables and assume the exposure epidemiology lens. We propose a conceptual framework utilizing education, wealth, and healthcare access as primary indicators of occupational cardiorespiratory risk. This protocol encompasses key socioeconomic status (SES) predictors to produce a Socioeconomic Risk Matrix (SRM). Methods Prioritizing utilization in cohort studies, data will be obtained from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. A random forest regression assigns each SRM variable a weighting according to its likelihood of impacting risk. Each variable contributes an ordinal risk level, where a 3-way matrix produces a 0 to 1 risk score. Relative risk of COPD will be estimated based on SRM risk quartiles using multinomial logistic regression. Results Using SRM as an interdisciplinary approach to occupational epidemiology identifies the magnitude of socioeconomic variables’ impact on occupational disease risk. We expect SRM to allow for expanded data utilization within and between occupational groups/clusters. Discussion This approach may indicate a necessity for analyzing additional SRM variables individually and inter-relatedly to support their associative impact on occupational, cardiorespiratory health outcomes. Remodelling SRM’s risk scoring structure may expose interactions between socioeconomic and lifestyle factors in the context of occupational exposure, providing a multidimensional approach to occupational risk estimation. The SRM lacks direct reproducibility, as different cohort samples reflect diverse SES combinations, however this orients future studies in occupational health to an SES-centric approach over traditional exposure-centric investigations. Conclusion SRM may act as a primer for improved SES matrices, incorporating variance in workplace and geo-cultural factors where relevant.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hadidi et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: