EDP Sciences logo
Subscriber Authentication Point
Search
Menu
Home All issues Volume 38 / No 3 (Mars 2022) Med Sci (Paris), 38 3 (2022) 288-293 References
Exposome
Open Access
Issue
Med Sci (Paris)
Volume 38, Number 3, Mars 2022
Exposome
Page(s) 288 - 293
Section M/S Revues
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/medsci/2022022
Published online 25 March 2022
  1. Wild CP. Complementing the genome with an “exposome”: the outstanding challenge of environmental exposure measurement in molecular epidemiology. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005 ; 14 : 1847–1850. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Wild CP. The exposome: from concept to utility. Int J Epidemiol 2012 ; 41 : 24–32. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Barouki R. L’exposome, un concept holistique et utile. Bulletin de l’Académie Nationale de Médecine 2020; 204 : 299–305. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Faisandier L, Bonneterre V, De Gaudemaris R, et al. Occupational exposome: a network-based approach for characterizing Occupational Health Problems. J Biomed Inform 2011 ; 44 : 545–552. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Gomez PY. Le travail invisible: Enquête sur une disparition. Paris: François Bourin éditeur, 2013 : 262 p. [Google Scholar]
  6. Roquelaure Y. Musculoskeletal disorders and psychosocial factors at work / Reports /. European Trade Union Institute (ETUI) 2018. [Google Scholar]
  7. McKinsey Global Institute. The future of work in Europe: Automation, workforce transitions and the shifting geography of employment 2020. [Google Scholar]
  8. Milasi S, Fernandez-Macias E, Gonzales-Vazquez I. Telework in the EU before and after the COVID-19: where we were, where we head to. JRC Science for Policy Brief 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/sites/jrcsh/files/jrc120945_policy_brief_-_covid_and_telework_final.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  9. Beatriz M, Bèque M, Coutrot T, et al. Quelles conséquences de la crise sanitaire sur les conditions de travail et les risques psychosociaux ? Dares Analyses 2021; 28. [Google Scholar]
  10. Eurofound. Working conditions in sectors. Luxembourg : Publications Office of the European Union, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  11. EU-OSHA. ESENER 2019: what does it tell us about safety and health in Europe’s workplaces?. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2019: 2020. [Google Scholar]
  12. Roquelaure Y. New forms of work in the digital era: implications for psychosocial risks and musculoskeletal disorders- Discussion paper. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work 2021. https://osha.europa.eu/fr/publications/digitalisation-work-psychosocial-risk-factors-and-work-related-musculoskeletal-disorders/view. [Google Scholar]
  13. Bérastégui P. Exposure to psychosocial risk factors in the gig economy: a systematic review. Bruxelles : European Trade Union Institute (ETUI), 2021. [Google Scholar]
  14. Eurofound. Sixth European Working Conditions Survey: overview report. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  15. Memmi S, Rosankis E, Sandret N, et al. Comment ont évolué les expositions des salariés du secteur privé aux risques professionnels sur les vingt dernières années ? Premiers résultats de l’enquête Sumer 2017. 2019; DARES analyses 2019; 41. https://www.inrs.fr/media.html?refINRS=TF%20273. [Google Scholar]
  16. Bastos H. PLAN SANTE AU TRAVAIL 2016–2020 - Amélioration et prise en compte de la polyexposition - Profils homogènes de travailleurs polyexposés. Anses 2020. https://www.anses.fr/fr/system/files/PST3_ProfilTravailleursExposes_Polyexposition.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  17. Fourneau C, Pernelet Joly V, Sanchez M, et al. PLAN SANTE-TRAVAIL 3 Action 1.11: Amélioration et prise en compte de la polyexposition « Profils homogènes de travailleurs polyexposés ». 2021. https://www.actu-environnement.com/media/pdf/news-38595-PST3-ProfilTravailleursExposes-Polyexposition.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  18. Eyles E, Manley D, Jones K. Occupied with classification: Which occupational classification scheme better predicts health outcomes?. Soc Sci Med 2019 ; 227 : 56–62. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Roquelaure Y.. Promoting a Shared Representation of Workers’ Activities to Improve Integrated Prevention of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders. Saf Health Work 2016 ; 7 : 171–174. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Dahlgren G, Whitehead M. The Dahlgren-Whitehead model of health determinants: 30 years on and still chasing rainbows. Public Health 2021; 199 : 20–4. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. NORA Organization of Work Team Members. The Changing Organization of Work and the Safety and Health of Working People. Cincinnati: NIOSH, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  22. St-Vincent M, Vézina N, Bellemare M, et al. L’intervention en ergonomie. Québec: Éditions MultiMondes, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  23. Garrigou A, Baldi I, Le Frious P, et al. Ergonomics contribution to chemical risks prevention: An ergotoxicological investigation of the effectiveness of coverall against plant pest risk in viticulture. Appl Ergon 2011 ; 42 : 321–330. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Coutarel F, Daniellou F, Dugué B. Interroger l’organisation du travail au regard des marges de manœuvre en conception et en fonctionnement. La rotation est-elle une solution aux TMS ? Pistes 2003; 5. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.