MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412629894 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.5c01742

Familial Differences in Personal PM<sub>2.5</sub> Exposure within a Rural African Community Explained with Spatiotemporal Exposure Apportionment

2025· article· en· W4412629894 on OpenAlexaff
Ky Tanner, Howard H. Chang, Maggie L. Clark, Vincent Cleveland, Egide Kalisa, Kayleigh P. Keller, Christian L’Orange, Théoneste Ntakirutimana, Casey Quinn, Rebecca Witinok-Huber, Bonnie N. Young, John Volckens

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsEnvironmental healthPsychological interventionDemographyApportionmentRural areaGeographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exposure to fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) from solid-fuel combustion is a major determinant of global morbidity and mortality. However, variations in exposure remain uncertain across many high-risk populations. This work describes personal PM 2.5 exposures among household members (adult men, adult women, and children) in rural sub-Saharan Africa, where biomass fuel is the primary household energy source. We assessed personal PM 2.5 exposures using wearable monitors that combined real-time sensing, time-integrated (gravimetric filter) sampling, and continuous location-activity tracking over 48 h periods. A total of 1280 samples were collected from 579 Rwandan homes over a 15-month period comprising 304 men (aged 23–84 years), 495 women (aged 20–84 years), and 481 children (aged 8–17 years). Linear mixed models, controlling for household, suggested that children were exposed to 14% (CI: 6, 22%) more PM 2.5 than their mothers and 100% (CI: 85, 117%) more than their fathers. Spatiotemporal analyses, aggregated into various microenvironments (e.g., home, school, transit, agricultural fieldwork), reveal that children bore a disproportionate exposure burden from in-home cooking activities compared with their parents. Results from this work indicate that interventions for household energy systems, in conjunction with familial lifestyle and behavior modifications, are necessary to reduce personal PM 2.5 exposures in rural Rwanda, especially among children.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & Technology→Same topicAir Quality and Health Impacts→French-language works237,207→