Assessing Exposure to Household Air Pollution: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Carbon Monoxide as a Surrogate Measure of Particulate Matter

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Assessing Exposure to Household Air Pollution: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Carbon Monoxide as a Surrogate Measure of Particulate Matter

Citable link to this page

 

 
Title: Assessing Exposure to Household Air Pollution: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Carbon Monoxide as a Surrogate Measure of Particulate Matter
Author: Carter, Ellison; Norris, Christina; Dionisio, Kathie L.; Balakrishnan, Kalpana; Checkley, William; Clark, Maggie L.; Ghosh, Santu; Jack, Darby W.; Kinney, Patrick L.; Marshall, Julian D.; Naeher, Luke P.; Peel, Jennifer L.; Sambandam, Sankar; Schauer, James J.; Smith, Kirk R.; Wylie, Blair J.; Baumgartner, Jill

Note: Order does not necessarily reflect citation order of authors.

Citation: Carter, E., C. Norris, K. L. Dionisio, K. Balakrishnan, W. Checkley, M. L. Clark, S. Ghosh, et al. 2017. “Assessing Exposure to Household Air Pollution: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Carbon Monoxide as a Surrogate Measure of Particulate Matter.” Environmental Health Perspectives 125 (7): 076002. doi:10.1289/EHP767. http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP767.
Full Text & Related Files:
Abstract: Background: Household air pollution from solid fuel burning is a leading contributor to disease burden globally. Fine particulate matter (PM2.5) is thought to be responsible for many of these health impacts. A co-pollutant, carbon monoxide (CO) has been widely used as a surrogate measure of PM2.5 in studies of household air pollution. Objective: The goal was to evaluate the validity of exposure to CO as a surrogate of exposure to PM2.5 in studies of household air pollution and the consistency of the PM2.5–CO relationship across different study settings and conditions. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of studies with exposure and/or cooking area PM2.5 and CO measurements and assembled 2,048 PM2.5 and CO measurements from a subset of studies (18 cooking area studies and 9 personal exposure studies) retained in the systematic review. We conducted pooled multivariate analyses of PM2.5–CO associations, evaluating fuels, urbanicity, season, study, and CO methods as covariates and effect modifiers. Results: We retained 61 of 70 studies for review, representing 27 countries. Reported PM2.5–CO correlations (r) were lower for personal exposure (range: 0.22–0.97; median=0.57) than for cooking areas (range: 0.10–0.96; median=0.71). In the pooled analyses of personal exposure and cooking area concentrations, the variation in ln(CO) explained 13% and 48% of the variation in ln(PM2.5), respectively. Conclusions: Our results suggest that exposure to CO is not a consistently valid surrogate measure of exposure to PM2.5. Studies measuring CO exposure as a surrogate measure of PM exposure should conduct local validation studies for different stove/fuel types and seasons. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP767
Published Version: doi:10.1289/EHP767
Other Sources: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5744652/pdf/
Terms of Use: This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of-use#LAA
Citable link to this page: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:34651948
Downloads of this work:

Show full Dublin Core record

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

 
 

Search DASH


Advanced Search
 
 

Submitters