Assessment of children's personal and land use regression model-estimated exposure to NO2 in Springfield, Massachusetts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ambient nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) is derived from tailpipe vehicle emission and is linked with various of health outcomes. Personal exposure monitoring is crucial for accurate assessment of the associated disease risks. This study aimed to evaluate the utility of a wearable air pollutant sampler in determining the personal NO 2 exposure of school children for comparison with a model-based personal exposure assessment. We employed cost-effective, wearable passive samplers to directly measure personal exposure of 25 children (aged 12–13 years) in Springfield, MA to NO 2 over a five-day period in winter 2018. NO 2 levels were additionally measured at 40 outdoor sites in the same region using stationary passive samplers. A land use regression (LUR) model was developed based on the ambient NO 2 measures, with a good prediction performance (R 2 = 0.72) using road lengths, distance to highway, and institutional land area as predictor variables . Time-weighted averages (TWA), which incorporated the time-activity patterns of participants and LUR-derived estimates in children's primary microenvironments (homes, the school and commute paths), were calculated as an indirect measure of personal NO 2 exposure. Results indicated that the conventional residence-based exposure estimate approach, often used in epidemiological studies , differed from the direct personal exposure and could overestimate the personal exposure by up to 109 %. TWA improved personal NO 2 exposure estimates by accounting for the time activity patterns of individuals, a difference of 5.4 % ± 34.2 % was found for exposures compared to wristband measurements. Nevertheless, the personal wristband measurements exhibited a large variability due to the potential contributions from indoor and in-vehicle NO 2 sources. The findings suggest that exposure to NO 2 can be highly personalized based on individual activities and contact with pollutants in specific microenvironments, reaffirming the importance of measuring personal exposure.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".