Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36560038›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Correction and Accuracy of PurpleAir PM

Karoline K Barkjohn, Amara L Holder, Samuel G Frederick, Andrea L Clements

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Validation of PurpleAir PMACS ES&T air · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Hourly PMACS ES&T air · 2026
    Article
  8. Wildfire smoke-related PMEnvironment international · 2026
    Article
  9. PurpleAir Sensor Deployment Trends and Uncertainties.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  13. Calibration of low-cost sensor data for ambient PMAtmospheric pollution research · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. CyanoHABs and CAPs: assessing community-based monitoring of PMEnvironmental science: atmospheres · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Skyrocketing pollution: assessing the environmental fate of July 4th fireworks in New York City.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2025
    Article
  18. Evaluation of Long-Term Performance of Six PMSensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Karoline K BarkjohnUS Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC 27711, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6197-4499
Amara L HolderUS Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC 27711, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6443-5298
Samuel G FrederickFormer ORAU Student Services Contractor, US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC 27711, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3552-1063
Andrea L ClementsUS Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NC 27711, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0764-5584
Environmental Protection Agency · US

Funding

EPA internal
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PurpleAir particulate matter (PM) sensors are increasingly used in the United States and other countries for real-time air quality information, particularly during wildfire smoke episodes. Uncorrected PurpleAir data can be biased and may exhibit a nonlinear response at extreme smoke concentrations (>300 µg/m3). This bias and nonlinearity result in a disagreement with the traditional ambient monitoring network, leading to the public’s confusion during smoke episodes. These sensors must be evaluated during smoke-impacted times and then corrected for bias, to ensure that accurate data are reported. The nearby public PurpleAir sensor and monitor pairs were identified during the summer of 2020 and were used to supplement the data from collocated pairs to develop an extended U.S.-wide correction for high concentrations. We evaluated several correction schemes to identify an optimal correction, using the previously developed U.S.-wide correction, up to 300 µg/m3, transitioning to a quadradic fit above 400 µg/m3. The correction reduces the bias at each air quality index (AQI) breakpoint; most ambient collocations that were studied met the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) performance targets (twelve of the thirteen ambient sensors met the EPA’s targets) and some smoke-impacted sites (5 out of 15 met the EPA’s performance targets in terms of the 1-h averages). This correction can also be used to improve the comparability of PurpleAir sensor data with regulatory-grade monitors when they are collectively analyzed or shown together on public information websites; the methods developed in this paper can also be used to correct future air-sensor types. The PurpleAir network is already filling in spatial and temporal gaps in the regulatory monitoring network and providing valuable air-quality information during smoke episodes.

Indexed as

Air PollutantsAir PollutionWildfiresEnvironmental MonitoringParticulate MatterSmokeUnited StatesAir PollutantsParticulate MatterSmokeair quality index (AQI)air sensorcorrectionevaluationPM2.5PurpleAirwildfire smoke

Identifiers

PMID36560038
PMCPMC9784900
OpenAlexW4312127483

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.