{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016771488469601678, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0031446540880503146, 'mean_word_length': 5.241830065359477, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of various passive monitors and active monitors for industrial hygiene sampling.

A framework for evaluating passive or active industrial hygiene air sampling monitors on a cost-effectiveness basis is described. Five passive monitors and one active monitor (charcoal tube with pump) were compared in several hypothetical scenarios. Using certain assumptions regarding method validation costs, sampling equipment costs, and labor costs, both a per sample cost and a total annual cost were calculated for each type of sampling monitor as a function of total samples taken per year. The results of this study indicate that even when the additional expense of full validation of the passive sampling monitor is required, these monitors are more cost-effective than active monitors. A specific type of passive monitor utilizing replaceable capsules is the most cost-effective when more than 500 samples per year are taken.