THE EFFECT OF PERSONAL PROTECTIVE AIDS ON HYPERTENSION AND DIABETES IN PEOPLE LIVING WITH HIGH LEVELS OF CHRONIC AIR POLLUTION: A RANDOMIZED CROSSOVER STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CVD Prevention – Primary and Secondary Air pollution is a leading cause of cardiometabolic diseases, especially in the Global South. Exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) has been linked to an increased risk of hypertension (HTN) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Controlled studies show indoor air purifiers and N95 masks lower blood pressure and plasma glucose over short periods, but their real-world effectiveness is unclear. This study evaluates their impact on Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) and Fasting Blood Glucose (FBG) with routine use. A prospective, randomized crossover study was conducted in Dalkhola, India, a region with high ambient PM2.5 levels. Seventy-two participants with HTN and/or T2DM were recruited. The intervention included using an indoor air purifier at night and a N95 mask outdoors, while the control group used identical devices with sham filtration. Participants and assessors were blinded to study assignment, and primary outcomes assessed were changes in SBP and FBG (Figure 1). Pre-study controlled testing of the indoor air purifier demonstrated a 67% reduction in PM2.5 levels but real-world use showed no significant difference between groups. SBP decreased by 4.6 ± 11.9 mmHg in the control period and remained unchanged in the intervention period (0 ± 12.0 mmHg; difference: 4.6 mmHg, 95% CI: 0.9 to 8.9, p = 0.02). FBG decreased by 8.3 ± 23.5 mg/dL (control) vs. 2.2 ± 28.5 mg/dL (intervention; difference: 6.2 mg/dL, 95% CI: -4.7 to 17.2, p = 0.26). Focus group discussions revealed that participants opened windows at night due to heat in summer, turned off purifiers due to cold in winter or noise, and limited use over electricity cost concerns. Routine use of indoor air purifiers and N95 masks did not significantly reduce indoor PM2.5 levels or improve SBP and FBG in an area of high ambient air pollution. Unlike regulated conditions, routine use is often suboptimal due to environmental, behavioral and economic factors, making air purifiers unlikely to improve cardiometabolic health in chronically polluted regions of the global south.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".