A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Examining the representativeness of home outdoor PM(2.5), EC, and OC estimates for daily personal exposures in Southern California. | LitMetric

Recent studies have linked acute respiratory and cardiovascular outcomes to measurements or estimates of traffic-related air pollutants at homes or schools. However, few studies have evaluated these outdoor measurements and estimates against personal exposure measurements. We compared measured and modeled home outdoor concentrations with personal measurements of traffic-related air pollutants in the Los Angeles air basin (Whittier and Riverside). Personal exposure of 63 children with asthma and 15 homes were assessed for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 μm (PM(2.5)), elemental carbon (EC), and organic carbon (OC) during sixteen 10-day monitoring runs. Regression models to predict daily home outdoor PM(2.5), EC, and OC were constructed using home outdoor measurements, geographical and meteorological parameters, as well as CALINE4 estimates at outdoor home sites, which represent the concentrations from local traffic sources. These home outdoor models showed the variance explained (R(2)) was 0.97 and 0.94 for PM(2.5), 0.91 and 0.83 for OC, and 0.76 and 0.87 for EC in Riverside and Whittier, respectively. The PM(2.5) outdoor estimates correlated well with the personal measurements (Riverside R(2) = 0.65 and Whittier R(2) = 0.69). However, excluding potentially inaccurate samples from Riverside, the correlation between personal exposure to carbonaceous species and home outdoor estimates in Whittier was moderate for EC (R(2) = 0.37) and poor for OC (R(2) = 0.08). The CALINE4 estimates alone were not correlated with personal measurements of EC or other pollutants. While home outdoor estimates provide good approximations for daily personal PM(2.5) exposure, they may not be adequate for estimating daily personal exposure to EC and OC. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11869-010-0099-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3427483PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11869-010-0099-yDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

personal exposure
16
daily personal
12
personal measurements
12
outdoor estimates
12
outdoor
10
personal
9
outdoor pm25
8
estimates
8
measurements estimates
8
traffic-related air
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!