Multinational prediction of household and personal exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) in the PURE cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Use of polluting cooking fuels generates household air pollution (HAP) containing health-damaging levels of fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Many global epidemiological studies rely on categorical HAP exposure indicators, which are poor surrogates of measured PM2.5 levels. To quantitatively characterize HAP levels on a large scale, a multinational measurement campaign was leveraged to develop household and personal PM2.5 exposure models. The Prospective Urban and Rural Epidemiology (PURE)-AIR study included 48-hour monitoring of PM2.5 kitchen concentrations (n = 2,365) and male and/or female PM2.5 exposure monitoring (n = 910) in a subset of households in Bangladesh, Chile, China, Colombia, India, Pakistan, Tanzania and Zimbabwe. PURE-AIR measurements were combined with survey data on cooking environment characteristics in hierarchical Bayesian log-linear regression models. Model performance was evaluated using leave-one-out cross validation. Predictive models were applied to survey data from the larger PURE cohort (22,480 households; 33,554 individuals) to quantitatively estimate PM2.5 exposures. The final models explained half (R2 = 54%) of the variation in kitchen PM2.5 measurements (root mean square error (RMSE) (log scale):2.22) and personal measurements (R2 = 48%; RMSE (log scale):2.08). Primary cooking fuel type, heating fuel type, country and season were highly predictive of PM2.5 kitchen concentrations. Average national PM2.5 kitchen concentrations varied nearly 3-fold among households primarily cooking with gas (20 μg/m3 (Chile); 55 μg/m3 (China)) and 12-fold among households primarily cooking with wood (36 μg/m3 (Chile)); 427 μg/m3 (Pakistan)). Average PM2.5 kitchen concentration, heating fuel type, season and secondhand smoke exposure were significant predictors of personal exposures. Modeled average PM2.5 female exposures were lower than male exposures in upper-middle/high-income countries (India, China, Colombia, Chile). Using survey data to estimate PM2.5 exposures on a multinational scale can cost-effectively scale up quantitative HAP measurements for disease burden assessments. The modeled PM2.5 exposures can be used in future epidemiological studies and inform policies targeting HAP reduction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 teacher head, 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".