2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.esd.2018.05.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Using personal exposure measurements of particulate matter to estimate health impacts associated with cooking in peri-urban Accra, Ghana

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
15
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
3
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…During static monitoring, wood and charcoal combustion resulted in average PM 2.5 concentrations ranging from 638 to 2184 µg/m 3 and 17 to 47 µg/m 3 , respectively ( Table 3 and Figure 6 ). The large difference between PM 2.5 concentrations associated with wood combustion compared to charcoal combustion are consistent with the relative rankings of these fuels in earlier research [ 2 , 28 , 29 ].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…During static monitoring, wood and charcoal combustion resulted in average PM 2.5 concentrations ranging from 638 to 2184 µg/m 3 and 17 to 47 µg/m 3 , respectively ( Table 3 and Figure 6 ). The large difference between PM 2.5 concentrations associated with wood combustion compared to charcoal combustion are consistent with the relative rankings of these fuels in earlier research [ 2 , 28 , 29 ].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…However, these studies came from a range of geographic contexts—largely Central and South America—that may not be as relevant to Sub-Saharan Africa. In a cross-sectional study in Accra, Ghana—a large urban city—households only using LPG had mean PM 2.5 exposure of 24 μg/m³, though households also reporting wood use or charcoal use had somewhat higher exposures (between 31 and 79 μg/m³) 55 . A study in rural Kenya estimated 48-hour personal CO exposure to be between 0.8 ppm to 1.3 ppm—concentrations comparable to those presented in this study 56 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…In doing so, we aim to estimate the amount of contamination due to filter handling, rather than from air pollution exposure. The PATS+ and UPAS have been laboratory validated and field tested in similar studies previously [22,[27][28][29][30].…”
Section: Estimating Personal Exposure To Fine Particulate Mattermentioning
confidence: 99%