Document YG8yDK4vJK4aDKmpqDYRNGzZK

Shanghai Health Study Proposal for SRP Support of Exposure Assessment Work Submitted by Robert Herrick and John Cherrie Introduction At the latest Shanghai Health Study Review Panels Workshop, held at the Woodlands Conference Center, 31 July - 2 August 2006, it was agreed that the exposure experts on the Scientific Review Panel (SRP) should prepare a proposal to provide additional ongoing support to the study exposure assessment team. This document outlines how this support could be provided. Outline plans It is suggested that we form a working group on exposure assessment, focused on the assessments for the case-control/disease progression studies. The group should comprise Robert Herrick (Harvard School of Public Health), John Cherrie (10M, Edinburgh), Tom Armstrong, Bob Schnatter, and others involved with the exposure assessment. It would be advantageous to have some involvement of Otto Wong and Harvey Checkoway, perhaps at some of the meetings or by correspondence. The main goal of this working group would be to provide advice and support during the final stages of the exposure assessment process. It has to be recognized that the members of the SRP are participating in this process as advisors and the responsibility for the assessments still rests with the investigators. However, the process should allow for a more detailed understanding of the methodology by the SRP members and they will be able to provide more practical and timely advice to the investigators. It is proposed that the working group would be chaired by Tom Armstrong. The first step in this support process is for the investigators to develop a list of the steps and tasks left to accomplish to the exposure assessment (including use of the IPHS database, feasibility of collecting new information). This list of tasks should be organized into a clear timeline with key milestones identified. The investigators should identify the steps and tasks that only they can do, and those that could be done by persons outside the current project team. Depending on resources available to the exposure assessment August 09, 2006 Page 1 of 2 SH ELL-MCCLU RG-062609 team they may wish to suggest that some of the work in the second category be undertaken by other organizations. It is suggested that the most appropriate way forward to finalize the exposure assessments is by industry sector where subjects have worked, i.e. shoe manufacture, paint manufacture and painting, rubber processes etc. A series of meetings of the Working Group should be scheduled, each focused on one or more of the major sectors. The purpose of these meetings would be for the investigators to bring the available data (summary of what is known about the industrial process, the available exposure data and the results of any simulation studies, plus a selection of translated work history and supplementary questionnaires) and for the group to prepare an agreed strategy to be used to make the exposure classifications. It may be possible to carry out some of the work by teleconference meetings, but it seems likely that much of the work would require face-to-face discussions. It may be appropriate to hold at least one meeting in Shanghai. Other meetings could be held in either the USA (Boston) or Scotland (Edinburgh). Costs We have budgeted 2 months (8 weeks) of consulting time, to include preparation, travel and follow-up activity for 5 Exposure Assessment workgroup sessions within the next 12 months. We have projected three of these meetings in the USA or Shanghai and two in Scotland when estimating travel costs. The resulting budgets for John Cherrie and Robert Herrick are $53,000 and $56,000, respectively: John Cherrie Consulting $235 (125)/hour Travel Expenses Total $41 ,000 (21 ,500) $12,000 (6,200) $53,000 Robert Herrick Consulting $235/hour Travel Expenses Total $41,000 $14,000 $56,000 August 09, 2006 Page 2 of 2 SHELL-MCCLURG-062610