Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 15, 2026

Evaluating Usability Aspects of a Mixed Reality Solution for Immersive Analytics in Industry 4.0 Scenarios
Published on: October 6, 2020
Comparison and Evaluation of Multiple Users' Usage of the Exposure and Risk Tool: Stoffenmanager 5.1
Hanna E Landberg1, Peter Berg2, Lennart Andersson2
11.Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Institute of Laboratory Medicine, University Hospital, 221 85 Lund, Sweden hanna.landberg@med.lu.se.
Abstract:
Stoffenmanager is an exposure and risk assessment tool that has a control banding part, with risk bands as outcome and a quantitative exposure assessment part, with the 90th percentile of the predicted exposure as a default outcome. The main aim of the study was to investigate whether multiple users of Stoffenmanager came to the same result when modelling the same scenarios. Other aims were to investigate the differences between outcomes of the control banding part with the measured risk quota and to evaluate the conservatism of the tool by testing whether the 90th percentiles are above the measured median exposures. We investigated airborne exposures at companies in four different types of industry: wood, printing, metal foundry, and spray painting. Three scenarios were modelled and measured, when possible, at each company. When modelled, 13 users visited each company on the same occasion creating individual assessments. Consensus assessments were also modelled for each scenario by six occupational hygienists. The multiple users' outcomes were often spread over two risk bands in the control banding part, and the differences in the quantitative exposure outcomes for the highest and lowest assessments per scenario varied between a factor 2 and 100. Four parameters were difficult for the users to assess and had a large impact on the outcome: type of task, breathing zone, personal protection, and control measures. Only two scenarios had a higher measured risk quota than predicted by the control banding part, also two scenarios had slightly higher measured median exposure value than modelled consensus in the quantitative exposure assessment part. Hence, the variability between users was large but the model performed well.
More Related Videos
05:47In Silico Modeling Method for Computational Aquatic Toxicology of Endocrine Disruptors: A Software-Based Approach Using QSAR Toolbox
Published on: August 28, 2019
04:53Author Spotlight: Advances in Evaluating Human Lung Epithelial Cells' Response to Metal-Organic Frameworks
Published on: May 26, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Multiple Comparison Tests
It would be easy to compare two samples using a significance alpha level of 0.05. In other words, there is only one sample pair to be compared. However, it would be difficult to identify a significantly different sample if the number...
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups