<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="6.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Van Eerd,D.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hogg-Johnson,S.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mazumder,A.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cole,D.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Wells,R.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Moore,A.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Task exposures in an office environment: a comparison of methods</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ergonomics</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ergonomics</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">measurement</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">musculoskeletal disorders</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">risk factors</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">upper extremity</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2009</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2009/10//test</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">52</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1248 - 1258</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Task-related factors such as frequency and duration are associated with musculoskeletal disorders in office settings. The primary objective was to compare various task recording methods as measures of exposure in an office workplace. A total of 41 workers from different jobs were recruited from a large urban newspaper (71% female, mean age 41 years SD 9.6). Questionnaire, task diaries, direct observation and video methods were used to record tasks. A common set of task codes was used across methods. Different estimates of task duration, number of tasks and task transitions arose from the different methods. Self-report methods did not consistently result in longer task duration estimates. Methodological issues could explain some of the differences in estimates seen between methods observed. It was concluded that different task recording methods result in different estimates of exposure likely due to different exposure constructs. This work addresses issues of exposure measurement in office environments. It is of relevance to ergonomists/researchers interested in how to best assess the risk of injury among office workers. The paper discusses the trade-offs between precision, accuracy and burden in the collection of computer task-based exposure measures and different underlying constructs captures in each method&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">10</style></issue><notes><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;DA - 20090929 IS - 1366-5847 (Electronic) LA - eng PT - Journal Article PT - Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't PT - Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S SB - IM SB - S&lt;/p&gt;</style></notes><custom1><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;a href=&quot;/biblio/custom1/preventing-msds&quot;&gt;Preventing MSDs&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;a href=&quot;/biblio/custom1/measuring-health-function&quot;&gt;measuring health &amp; function&lt;/a&gt;</style></custom1></record></records></xml>
