Join Dogful Login
  • Hazel Teague posted an update 1 year, 4 months ago

    5 and PM2.5�C10 on all cause and cause-specific mortality. Effect estimates for PM2.5 were similar to what we observed in the Netherlands, especially for all cause mortality (1.0% 95% CI 0.8�C1.2) and cardiovascular mortality (0.9% 95% CI 0.5�C1.2). Effects for PM2.5�C10 were 0.5% (95% CI 0.2�C0.7), 0.3% (95% CI 0.0�C0.6) and 1.2% (95% CI 0.4�C1.9) for all cause, cardiovascular and respiratory mortality respectively. The absence of significant of PM2.5�C10 in our study can partly be due to the low concentrations and low day-to-day variability in PM2.5�C10 concentrations, and therefore low statistical power to detect effects. Similarly low PM2.5�C10 concentrations (average <?10?��g/m3) were observed in Helsinki, London en the West-Midlands, where also little significant effects Selleck Saracatinib of PM2.5�C10 were ISRIB found. With the exception of Stockholm, where PM2.5�C10 levels were also low, cities in which significant effects of PM2.5?�C10 were observed all had higher levels (��15?��g/m3). In addition, PM2.5�C10 was not directly monitored but calculated as the difference between PM10 and PM2.5. Therefore precision is lower for PM2.5�C10 compared to PM2.5 or PM10. Nationwide average ambient PM concentrations were used to estimate exposure for the entire population of the Netherlands. For PM2.5 and PM10, concentrations measured at each of the individual monitoring sites were highly correlated with concentrations measured at the other 9 sites, indicating that the day-to-day variability in PM2.5 and PM10 concentrations across the country is well represented by the temporal variability in the nationwide average. However, these correlations were lower for PM2.5�C10, indicating higher exposure misclassification of PM2.5�C10 compared to PM2.5 or PM10. This adds to a lower power to detect significant effects of PM2.5�C10 in our study. Puustinen et al (2007) evaluated the spatial variation in PNC, soot, PM2.5, PM10 and PM2.5�C10 in four European cities (Amsterdam, Athens, Birmingham and Helsinki). Median temporal correlations between central site and residential outdoor concentrations were also generally lower for PM2.5�C10 compared to PM2.5 or PM10. In addition, with the exception of Athens, correlations between indoor and outdoor concentrations in the same study were also much lower for PM2.5�C10 than for PM2.5 (Hoek Selleckchem CAL101 et al., 2008). PM10 and PM2.5 were both significantly associated with all cause and cause-specific mortality. We were unable to demonstrate significant effects for PM2.5�C10, possibly due to the lower temporal variability and higher exposure misclassification in PM2.5�C10 compared to PM10 or PM2.5. The lack of effects of PM2.5�C10 in our study should therefore not be interpreted as an indication that PM2.5�C10 can be considered harmless. The study was funded by the Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment.