Article

PM2.5 of ambient origin: estimates and exposure errors relevant to PM epidemiology.

Department of Environmental Sciences, Rutgers University, 14 College Farm Road, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901, USA.
Environmental Science and Technology (Impact Factor: 5.26). 08/2005; 39(14):5105-12. DOI:10.1021/es048226f
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Epidemiological studies routinely use central-site particulate matter (PM) as a surrogate for exposure to PM of ambient (outdoor) origin. Below we quantify exposure errors that arise from variations in particle infiltration to aid evaluation of the use of this surrogate, rather than actual exposure, in PM epidemiology. Measurements from 114 homes in three cities from the Relationship of Indoor, Outdoor and Personal Air (RIOPA) study were used. Indoor PM2.5 of outdoor origin was calculated as follows: (1) assuming a constant infiltration factor, as would be the case if central-site PM were a "perfect surrogate" for exposure to outdoor particles; (2) including variations in measured air exchange rates across homes; (3) also incorporating home-to-home variations in particle composition, and (4) calculating sample-specific infiltration factors. The final estimates of PM2.5 of outdoor origin take into account variations in building construction, ventilation practices, and particle properties that result in home-to-home and day-to-day variations in particle infiltration. As assumptions became more realistic (from the first, most constrained model to the fourth, least constrained model), the mean concentration of PM2.5 of outdoor origin increased. Perhaps more importantly, the bandwidth of the distribution increased. These results quantify several ways in which the use of central site PM results in underestimates of the ambient PM2.5 exposure distribution bandwidth. The result is larger uncertainties in relative risk factors for PM2.5 than would occur if epidemiological studies used more accurate exposure measures. In certain situations this can lead to bias.

0 0
 · 
0 Bookmarks
 · 
77 Views
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Exposure to ambient (outdoor-generated) fine particulate matter (PM(2.5)) occurs predominantly indoors. The variable efficiency with which ambient PM(2.5) penetrates and persists indoors is a source of exposure error in air pollution epidemiology and could contribute to observed temporal and spatial heterogeneity in health effect estimates. We used a mass balance approach to model F for several scenarios across which heterogeneity in effect estimates has been observed: with geographic location of residence, residential roadway proximity, socioeconomic status, and central air-conditioning use. We found F is higher in close proximity to primary combustion sources (e.g. proximity to traffic) and for lower income homes. F is lower when PM(2.5) is enriched in nitrate and with central air-conditioning use. As a result, exposure error resulting from variability in F will be greatest when these factors have high temporal and/or spatial variability. The circumstances for which F is lower in our calculations correspond to circumstances for which lower effect estimates have been observed in epidemiological studies and higher F values correspond to higher effect estimates. Our results suggest that variability in exposure misclassification resulting from variability in F is a possible contributor to heterogeneity in PM-mediated health effect estimates.
    Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology 05/2012; 22(5):448-54. · 3.19 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although individuals spend the majority of their time indoors, most epidemiological studies estimate personal air pollution exposures based on outdoor levels. This almost certainly results in exposure misclassification as pollutant infiltration varies between homes. However, it is often not possible to collect detailed measures of infiltration for individual homes in large-scale epidemiological studies and thus there is currently a need to develop models that can be used to predict these values. To address this need, we examined infiltration of fine particulate matter (PM(2.5)) and identified determinants of infiltration for 46 residential homes in Toronto, Canada. Infiltration was estimated using the indoor/outdoor sulphur ratio and information on hypothesized predictors of infiltration were collected using questionnaires and publicly available databases. Multiple linear regression was used to develop the models. Mean infiltration was 0.52 ± 0.21 with no significant difference across heating and non-heating seasons. Predictors of infiltration were air exchange, presence of central air conditioning, and forced air heating. These variables accounted for 38% of the variability in infiltration. Without air exchange, the model accounted for 26% of the variability. Effective modelling of infiltration in individual homes remains difficult, although key variables such as use of central air conditioning show potential as an easily attainable indicator of infiltration.
    International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 08/2010; 7(8):3211-24. · 2.00 Impact Factor
  • [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Multi-city population-based epidemiological studies have consistently reported a significant association between ambient fine particulate matter (PM2.5) concentrations and daily mortality. However, in these studies heterogeneity between-community effect estimates is often observed but not thoroughly examined, leaving much of the difference in the effects of individual communities inadequately explained. In this study, we evaluated whether community-specific exposure factors play a role in explaining heterogeneity in the associations between ambient PM2.5 concentrations and several causes of mortality in 27 US communities from 1997 to 2002 as reported by Franklin et al. (J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol 3:279–287, 2007). Using publically available databases, we created factors capturing home ventilation characteristics and commuting patterns. These factors include the normalized leakage, annual and seasonal temperatures, and in-vehicle commuting distances and time. In-vehicle commuting distance and time, and annual, spring, and fall temperatures were significant negative effect modifiers of the relationship between PM2.5 exposure and respiratory and non-accidental mortality. Additionally, cardiovascular mortality PM2.5 effect estimates were negatively modified by in-vehicle commuting distances. We concluded that future multi-community studies of particle health effects should consider these and other determinants of personal–ambient exposure relationships during the epidemiological analysis.
    Air Quality Atmosphere & Health 01/2011; · 1.98 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
13 Downloads
Available from
Sep 8, 2013