| Literature DB >> 28080048 |
Evi Dons1,2, Michelle Laeremans1,3, Juan Pablo Orjuela4, Ione Avila-Palencia5,6,7, Glòria Carrasco-Turigas5,6,7, Tom Cole-Hunter5,6,7,8, Esther Anaya-Boig4, Arnout Standaert1, Patrick De Boever1,2, Tim Nawrot2, Thomas Götschi9, Audrey de Nazelle4, Mark Nieuwenhuijsen5,6,7, Luc Int Panis1,3.
Abstract
Physical activity and ventilation rates have an effect on an individual's dose and may be important to consider in exposure-response relationships; however, these factors are often ignored in environmental epidemiology studies. The aim of this study was to evaluate methods of estimating the inhaled dose of air pollution and understand variability in the absence of a true gold standard metric. Five types of methods were identified: (1) methods using (physical) activity types, (2) methods based on energy expenditure, METs (metabolic equivalents of task), and oxygen consumption, (3) methods based on heart rate or (4) breathing rate, and (5) methods that combine heart and breathing rate. Methods were compared using a real-life data set of 122 adults who wore devices to track movement, black carbon air pollution, and physiological health markers for 3 weeks in three European cities. Different methods for estimating minute ventilation performed well in relative terms with high correlations among different methods, but in absolute terms, ignoring increased ventilation during day-to-day activities could lead to an underestimation of the daily dose by a factor of 0.08-1.78. There is no single best method, and a multitude of methods are currently being used to approximate the dose. The choice of a suitable method for determining the dose in future studies will depend on both the size and the objectives of the study.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28080048 DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.6b05782
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Sci Technol ISSN: 0013-936X Impact factor: 9.028