MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Infiltration of Forest Fire and Wood Smoke: An Intervention Study to Assess Air Cleaner Effectiveness

2006· article· en· W1988592950 on OpenAlexaffabout
Prabjit Barn, Timothy V. Larson, Melanie Noullett, Ray Copes, Susan Kennedy, Michael Bräuer

Bibliographic record

VenueEpidemiology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceHEPASmokeInfiltration (HVAC)ParticulatesAir pollutionEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental healthMeteorologyGeographyFilter (signal processing)MedicineEngineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

P-289 Introduction: Forest fires and residential wood-burning are significant sources of air pollution. PM2.5 from these sources has been linked to adverse health effects. Consequently, exposed populations should be provided with evidence-based recommendations on exposure reduction. Recommendations typically include remaining indoors and use of air cleaners, yet little information is available on PM infiltration during smoke episodes or on effectiveness of air cleaners in reducing indoor concentrations. Specific research objectives of this study were to measure indoor infiltration of outdoor PM2.5 from forest fires/residential wood-smoke and to determine effectiveness of High Efficiency Particulate Air (HEPA) filter air cleaners in reducing indoor PM2.5. Methods: Indoor and outdoor PM2.5 sampling was conducted over a 48-hour period in 21 homes during winter and in 16 homes during summer. Winter sampling was conducted in 2004 in a northern Canadian community affected by residential wood-burning. Summer sampling was conducted in 2004 and 2005 in southern British Columbia, Canada in communities impacted by forest fire smoke. Continuous 1-minute averages using a light-scattering device (personal DataRAM) and integrated 48-hour filter samples (Harvard Impactor) of PM were collected for each home. A portable HEPA filter air cleaner was operated indoors during the entire sampling period, however the filter was removed for 1 of the 2 days. Infiltration factors (Finf) were calculated using a recursive model (Switzer and Ott. 2001) after removal of indoor-generated PM2.5 data using censoring algorithms (Allen et al. 2003). Results: Valid 48 hour samples were obtained from 19 homes in winter and 12 homes in summer. Average wintertime PM2.5 concentrations were 14.2ug/m3 and 35.6ug/m3 for indoor and outdoor measurements respectively. Average summer concentrations were 12.3ug/m3 and 29.2ug/m3 for indoor and outdoor measurements respectively. For days when the filter was not used, mean Finf± SD values of 0.29±0.20 and 0.53±0.32 were found for winter and summer homes respectively. On days with filter use, Finf± SD was lower in both seasons with values of 0.11±0.10 and 0.22±0.24 for winter and summer respectively. Mean± SD air cleaner efficiencies ([Finf without filter - Finf with filter]/ Finf without filter) in summer and winter were 74±40% and 49±41% respectively. Effects of housing characteristics on infiltration and air cleaner efficiency based on multivariate models will also be presented. Discussion and Conclusions: For exposures to wood and forest fire smoke, infiltration was higher in summer versus winter and in both seasons air cleaners were effective in lowering Finf.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.288 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpidemiologySame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207