ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2008
Is PM(10) mass measurement a reliable index for air quality assessment? An environmental study in a geographical area of north-eastern Italy.
Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to measure the concentration of some metals (Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb, and Ti) in PM(10) samples collected in one urban and one industrial site and to assess that PM(10) total mass measurement may be not sufficient as air quality index due to its complex composition. Metals were determined by inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES) and differential pulsed anodic stripping voltammetry (DPASV). The measured concentrations were used to calculate the content of metals in the PM(10) total mass, and to estimate the enrichment factors and the correlations between PM(10), metal concentrations and meteorological data for the two sites. The mean PM10 concentration during the sampling period in the urban site exceeded the annual European Union (EU) standard (40 microg/m(3)) and, for some sampling days, the daily EU standard (50 microg/m(3)) was also exceeded. In opposite, both EU standards were never exceeded in the industrial site. The overall metal content was nearly double in the industrial site compared to the urban one, and the mean Ni concentration exceeded the EU annual limit value (10 ng/m(3)). The metals with the highest enrichment factor were Cd, Cu, Ni and Pb for both sites, suggesting a dominant anthropogenic source for these metals. Metal concentrations were very low and typical of rural background during Christmas holidays, when factories were closed. PM(10) total mass measurement is not a sufficient air quality index since the metal content of PM(10) is not related to its total mass, especially in sites with industrial activities. This measurement should be associated with the analysis of toxic metals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.