ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Indoor Pollen Concentrations of Mountain Cedar (
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. 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, 6 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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Standard pollen monitoring programs evaluate outdoor pollen concentrations; however, information on indoor pollen is crucial for human wellbeing as people spend most of the day in indoor environments. In this study, we investigated the differences in indoor mountain cedar pollen loads between rooms of different uses and with different ventilation at The University of Texas in Austin and focused on the effect of rainy episodes on indoor/outdoor ratios of pollen concentrations. Pollen were sampled outdoors and indoors, specifically in seven rooms and in two thermal labs with controlled ventilation, during the daytime on 6 days in 2015. We calculated daily pollen concentrations, campaign pollen integrals (CPIn, the sum of all daily pollen concentrations) and ratios between indoor and outdoor concentrations (I/O ratio). Pollen concentrations differed substantially based on features related to room use and ventilation: Whereas the highest CPIn was observed in a room characterized by a frequently opened window and door, the smallest CPIn was related to a storeroom without any windows and no forced ventilation. Our results showed that rainy episodes were linked to a higher mean I/O ratio (0.98; non-rainy episodes: 0.05). This suggests that pollen accumulated indoors and reached higher levels than outdoors. Low ratios seem to signal a low level of risk for allergic people when staying inside. However, under very high outdoor pollen concentrations, small ratios can still be associated with high indoor pollen levels. In turn, high I/O ratios are not necessarily related to a (very) high indoor exposure. Therefore, I/O ratios should be considered along with pollen concentration values for a proper risk assessment. Exposure may be higher in indoor environments during prevailing precipitation events and at the end of the pollen season of a specific species. Standardized indoor environments (e.g., thermal labs) should be included in pollen monitoring programs.
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.