↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of exposure estimation methods for air pollutants: Ambient monitoring data and regional air quality simulation

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Research, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
148 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Comparison of exposure estimation methods for air pollutants: Ambient monitoring data and regional air quality simulation
Published in
Environmental Research, May 2012
DOI 10.1016/j.envres.2012.04.008
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Air quality modeling could potentially improve exposure estimates for use in epidemiological studies. We investigated this application of air quality modeling by estimating location-specific (point) and spatially-aggregated (county level) exposure concentrations of particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 μm (PM(2.5)) and ozone (O(3)) for the eastern U.S. in 2002 using the Community Multi-scale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system and a traditional approach using ambient monitors. The monitoring approach produced estimates for 370 and 454 counties for PM(2.5) and O(3), respectively. Modeled estimates included 1861 counties, covering 50% more population. The population uncovered by monitors differed from those near monitors (e.g., urbanicity, race, education, age, unemployment, income, modeled pollutant levels). CMAQ overestimated O(3) (annual normalized mean bias=4.30%), while modeled PM(2.5) had an annual normalized mean bias of -2.09%, although bias varied seasonally, from 32% in November to -27% in July. Epidemiology may benefit from air quality modeling, with improved spatial and temporal resolution and the ability to study populations far from monitors that may differ from those near monitors. However, model performance varied by measure of performance, season, and location. Thus, the appropriateness of using such modeled exposures in health studies depends on the pollutant and metric of concern, acceptable level of uncertainty, population of interest, study design, and other factors.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Unknown 141 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 22%
Researcher 23 16%
Student > Master 22 15%
Student > Bachelor 10 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 5%
Other 20 14%
Unknown 33 22%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 41 28%
Engineering 21 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 9%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 6 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 21 14%
Unknown 41 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 June 2020.
All research outputs
#9,959,279
of 33,779,198 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Research
#4,234
of 10,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,648
of 209,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Research
#17
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,779,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,239 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 209,340 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.