ArticlePloS one2021
Air pollution exposure in relation to guard duty at Tidworth Camp: A cross-sectional study.
Article in PloS one, 2021. 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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAir pollution is the largest environmental health risk in the United Kingdom, and an issue of concern amongst outdoor workers. Road transport is a major source producing the largest amount of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and ozone (O3) (as a secondary pollutant). Hundreds of vehicles enter and exit the Tidworth Camp's main gate daily, potentially producing these pollutants. However, the air pollution exposure experienced by personnel on guard duty is unknown. This study aimed to determine and compare background NO2 and O3 levels experienced by personnel on guard duty.
methodsCross-sectional data was collected using a static sampling technic on randomly selected days of the week. Data analysis was done using IBM-SPSS-26 and a p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsThe background concentration of NO2 and O3 pollutants were within recommended limits. There was no significant difference between mean morning and afternoon exposure levels for both pollutants. However, NO2 and O3 levels were significantly higher during weekdays compared to weekends (M = -0.022, SD = 0.007, t(6) = -8.672, p <0.0001 and M = -0.016, SD = 0.008, t(6) = -5.040, p = 0.002 respectively). Both pollutants showed no significant differences in exposure levels when only weekdays were compared. NO2 levels showed a weak positive correlation during weekdays (r = 0.04) and a strong positive correlation during weekends (r = 0.96). O3 levels had a positive correlation on both weekdays and weekends; however, levels on Monday showed a negative correlation (r = -0.55). Linear regression analysis showed that outside temperature was a significant predictor of O3 levels (p = 0.026).
conclusionPersonnel on guard duty experienced higher pollution levels during weekdays compared to weekends; however, air pollution levels for both pollutants were within recommended limits. Further studies are recommended over hotter months using a personal sampling technic to measure personal air pollution exposure levels in order to minimise any health and safety risks.
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.