ERF for short term PM2.5 exposure and restricted activity days (RADs)
This page is a variable.
The page identifier is Op_en3440 |
|---|
| Moderator:Virpi Kollanus (see all) |
|
Give your opinion to the peer rating of the content of this page. |
| Upload data
|
Contents
Scope
Exposure-response function for short-term (acute) exposure to ambient air particulate matter (PM) with an aerodynamic diameter < 2.5 µm and restricted activity days (RADs). RAD is defined as a day when a person needs to change his/her normal activities because of ill-health. It is based on surveys among general population. In terms of severity, RADs include: 1) days needed to stay in bed, 2) days of work/school (WLS) and 3) days of other, less serious restrictions on normal activity (MRADs).
Dimensions and boundaries relevant for the variable
- Age of exposed population
- Country/other geographic area
Definition
Data
Ostro (1987) [1]
Restricted activity days (RADs) among adults aged 15-64:
- 0.475% (95% Cl 0.417%, 0.533%) increase in RADs per 1 µg/m3 PM2.5
- change of 902 RADs (95% Cl 792, 1013) per 10 µg/m3 PM2.5 per 1000 adults
- Assumes a background rate of 19 RADs per person per year, equivalent to a prevelance of 5.2%[2]
Causality
Unit
Increase in no. of RADs per 10 µg/m3 increase in exposure per 1000 people aged 15-64
Formula
Result
| Age group | RADs | 95% Cl |
|---|---|---|
| 15-64 | 902 | 792, 1013 |
See also
- Service Contract for Carrying out Cost-Benefit Analysis of Air Quality Related Issues, in particular in the Clean Air for Europe (CAFE) Programme. Volume 2: Health Impact Assessment. AEA Technology Environment, 2005.
- NEEDS - New Energy Externalities Developments for Sustainability, Deliverable 3.7 "A set of concentration-response function", Integrated Project, Sixth Framework Programme, Project no. 502687.
References
- ↑ Ostro BD (1987). Air pollution and morbidity revisited: a specification test. J Environ Econ Manage, 14: 87-98.
- ↑ ORNL/RFF (1994). Estimating Externalities of the Coal Fuel Cycle. Report 3 on the external costs and benefits of fuel cycles. A study by the US department of Energy and the Commission of the European Communities. Prepared by Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Resources for the Future. McGraw Hill.
