No abstract

Epidemiological studies of traffic-related air pollution typically estimate exposures at residential locations only; however, if study subjects spend time away from home, exposure measurement error, and therefore bias, may be introduced into epidemiological analyses. For two study areas (Vancouver, British Columbia, and Southern California), we use paired residence-and mobility-based estimates of individual exposure to ambient nitrogen dioxide, and apply error theory to calculate bias for scenarios when mobility is not considered. In Vancouver, the mean bias was 0.84 (range: 0.79-0.89; SD: 0.01), indicating potential bias of an effect estimate toward the null by B16% when using residence-based exposure estimates. Bias was more strongly negative (mean: 0.70, range: 0.63-0.77, SD: 0.02) when the underlying pollution estimates had higher spatial variation (land-use regression versus monitor interpolation). In Southern California, bias was seen to become more strongly negative with increasing time and distance spent away from home (e.g., 0.99 for 0-2 h spent at least 10 km away, 0.66 for Z10 h spent at least 40 km away). Our results suggest that ignoring daily mobility patterns can contribute to bias toward the null hypothesis in epidemiological studies using individual-level exposure estimates.

Individuals spend the majority of their time indoors; therefore, estimating infiltration of outdoor-generated fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) can help reduce exposure misclassification in epidemiological studies. As indoor measurements in individual homes are not feasible in large epidemiological studies, we evaluated the potential of using readily available data to predict infiltration of ambient PM 2.5 into residences. Indoor and outdoor light scattering measurements were collected for 84 homes in Seattle, Washington, USA, and Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, to estimate residential infiltration efficiencies. Meteorological variables and spatial property assessment data (SPAD), containing detailed housing characteristics for individual residences, were compiled for both study areas using a geographic information system. Multiple linear regression was used to construct models of infiltration based on these data. Heating (October to February) and non-heating (March to September) season accounted for 36% of the yearly variation in detached residential infiltration. Two SPAD housing characteristic variables, low building value, and heating with forced air, predicted 37% of the variation found between detached residential infiltration during the heating season. The final model, incorporating temperature and the two SPAD housing characteristic variables, with a seasonal interaction term, explained 54% of detached residential infiltration. Residences with low building values had higher infiltration efficiencies than other residences, which could lead to greater exposure gradients between low and high socioeconomic status individuals than previously identified using only ambient PM 2.5 concentrations. This modeling approach holds promise for incorporating infiltration efficiencies into large epidemiology studies, thereby reducing exposure misclassification.

Land use regression (LUR) is a method for predicting the spatial distribution of traffic-related air pollution. To facilitate risk and exposure assessment, and the design of future monitoring networks and sampling campaigns, we sought to determine the extent to which LUR can be used to predict spatial patterns in air pollution in the absence of dedicated measurements. We evaluate the transferability of one LUR model to two other geographically comparable areas with similar climates and pollution types. The source model, developed in 2003 to estimate ambient nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) concentrations in Vancouver (BC, Canada) was applied to Victoria (BC, Canada) and Seattle (WA, USA). Model estimates were compared with measurements made with Ogawa s passive samplers in both cities. As part of this study, 42 locations were sampled in Victoria for a 2-week period in June 2006. Data obtained for Seattle were collected for a different project at 26 locations in March 2005. We used simple linear regression to evaluate the fit of the source model under three scenarios: (1) using the same variables and coefficients as the source model; (2) using the same variables as the source model, but calculating new coefficients for local calibration; and (3) developing site-specific equations with new variables and coefficients. In Scenario 1, we found that the source model had a better fit in Victoria (R 2 ¼ 0.51) than in Seattle (R 2 ¼ 0.33). Scenario 2 produced improved R 2 -values in both cities (Victoria ¼ 0.58, Seattle ¼ 0.65), with further improvement achieved under Scenario 3 (Victoria ¼ 0.61, Seattle ¼ 0.72). Although it is possible to transfer LUR models between geographically similar cities, success may depend on the between-city consistency of the input data. Modest field sampling campaigns for location-specific model calibration can help to produce transfer models that are equally as predictive as their sources.

No abstract