AUTHOR ABSTRACT
There were many variables
included in the analyses of this study and interpretation of the statistical significance
assigned to them needs to be considered in light of the potential for making a
Type I error, or concluding that the difference is real when in fact the difference
occurred by chance. Since the significance level, which is the margin of error
associated with a Type I error, was pre-set at 0.05, for every 20 statistical
tests performed, the probability of at least one being statistically significant
has been calculated to be 0.64 (Rothman 1990). As indicated below, three of the
six significant findings relevant to the secondary hypotheses, and three of the
five significant findings relevant to the secondary hypotheses would have remained
significant if a significance level of less than or equal to 0.02 had been selected.
The cost of increasing the P value, however, increases the chance for making incorrect
conclusions of no differences (Rothman 1990). In addition, since all analyses
were based on a prior hypotheses and the resulting significant findings were consistent
with previous reported studies o findings that fit with nature, less concern can
be given to these findings reflecting Type I errors instead of true differences.
The following relevant
findings were identified through matched analyses of the data from the current
study.
Primary hypotheses:
- A higher proportion of
cases than controls reported the pre- existence of arthritis (p=0.02).
- A borderline significant
finding was that a higher proportion of cases, than controls reported the pre-existence
of stress, depression or other psychological problems (p=0.051).
- A higher proportion of
cases than controls reported regular use of prescription pain medicine (p=0.046).
- A significant trend was
indicated such than an increase in the number of farm hours worked was associated
with an increase risk of injury (p=0.002).
- The association between
lifetime involvement in farming on the basis of the four levels of exposure, "full-time
year round", "full- time seasonal", "part-time year round", and "part-time seasonal",
was significant (p=0.008), indicating the greater the amount of exposure, the
greater the risk of injury.
Secondary hypotheses:
- Cases, compared with controls,
had a higher index of injury history for farmwork related injuries that ever restricted
their usual activities for any length of time (p<0.0001).
- Cases, compared with controls,
had a higher index of injury history for farmwork related injuries for which they
ever sought medical care (p<0.0001).
- A nearly significant finding
indicated that cases reported more serious injuries in their lifetime than controls
(p=0.053).
- Unmatched analysis indicated
that there was a significant trend for an increasing number of acres in active
production being associated with an increased risk of injury (p=0.018). Matched
analysis, however, resulted in a non-significant finding except when examined
by type of enterprise. The number of acres was significantly associated with the
risk of injury for crop farmers (p=0.017) but not for livestock farmers (p=0.29).
Other findings
- Female cases were significantly
more likely than males cases to incur a farmwork related injury to the back or
spine (p=0.001).
- Female cases were significantly
more likely than female controls to report one pre-existing medical condition
compared to those respondents reporting zero pre-existing medical conditions (p=0.03).
- When farm variables were
considered simultaneously in multivariate modeling, the only factor which remained
significantly associated with the risk of injury was the number of hours spent
farming per week.
- When select pre-existing
medical conditions and medications were considered simultaneously with the number
of hours spent farming per week, arthritis and the number of farm hours contributed
separately and significantly to the risk of injury.
SOURCE AND NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE
ID#
SOURCE:
Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota; 1990. n.p.
NLOM ID#:
No ID#.
This
document was extracted from the CDC-NIOSH Epidemiology of
Farm Related Injuries: Bibliography With Abstracts, U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers
for Disease Control, National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health.
We are
unable to supply copies of the full report cited in this entry. Readers are advised
to use the following sources:
- Author or publisher: articles
are frequently available from the author or publisher.
- Medical or other research
libraries: these facilities often have the material on hand or know where it can
be obtained. If available, each journal entry includes the appropriate National
Library of Medicine unique identification number to aid in interlibrary loan requests.
- Government: some U.S.
Government-sponsored research reports, including ones out-of print, are available
from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce.
|
Disclaimer and Reproduction Information: Information in
NASD does not represent NIOSH policy. Information included in
NASD appears by permission of the author and/or copyright holder.
More