A novel methodology for using light-scattering sensors to measure indoor particulate matter in a multi-site clinical trial
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Measuring airborne fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) in the context of health-based field research introduces many logistical challenges including remote equipment setup, data access, and maintenance by both researchers and participants. In preparation for a 17-site, 228-household clinical trial, we developed methods to validate low-cost, light-scattering PM 2.5 sensors (model PAII-SD, PurpleAir, Inc, USA) against a Federal Equivalent Method instrument (model BAM 1020, Met One Instruments, USA) for remote measurement of indoor PM 2.5 concentrations among participating households over 6 months. To allow real-time, remote data access by the research team, we developed procedures for pairing the light-scattering PM 2.5 sensors for each household with a portable Wi-Fi hotspot device (model Solis Lite, Skyroam, Inc, USA) prior to shipping them to participants. Armed with this remote data access, we created a process for daily automated data extractions to ensure sensors remained online and to assess data quality. Our methods support the feasibility of obtaining long-term, continuous PM 2.5 measurement reliably and accurately in the context of a research trial using low-cost, light-scattering sensors. The framework we describe in this methods paper can serve as a model for future environmental health research studies.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- A novel methodology for using light-scattering sensors to measure indoor particulate matter in a multi-site clinical trial
- Date Crossref
- 31/03/2026
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.