Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37932665›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2023

School and childcare facility air quality decision-makers' perspectives on using low-cost sensors for wildfire smoke response.

Orly Stampfer, Stephanie Farquhar, Edmund Seto, Catherine J Karr

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Orly StampferDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, 4225 Roosevelt Way NE, Seattle, WA, 98105, USA. ostamp@uw.edu.
Stephanie FarquharDepartment of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington, 3980 15th Ave NE, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA.
Edmund SetoDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, 4225 Roosevelt Way NE, Seattle, WA, 98105, USA.
Catherine J KarrDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, 4225 Roosevelt Way NE, Seattle, WA, 98105, USA.
University of Washington · USTheodore Roosevelt High School · US

Funding

XENOBIOTIC BIOTRANSFORMATION AND DISPOSITIONP30ES007033 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Nicole Ann Errett · 1995 to 2026
$42.5M
School Wildfire Smoke PreparednessF31ES032634 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI STAMPFER, ORLY · 2021 to 2022
$87k
ACL HHS R01TS000296ATSDR CDC HHS R01 TS000296NIEHS NIH HHS F31 ES032634NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES007033
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring wildfire smoke episodes, school and childcare facility staff and those who support them rely upon air quality data to inform activity decisions. Where ambient regulatory monitor data is sparse, low-cost sensors can help inform local outdoor activity decisions, and provide indoor air quality data. However, there is no established protocol for air quality decision-makers to use sensor data for schools and childcare facilities. To develop practical, effective toolkits to guide the use of sensors in school and childcare settings, it is essential to understand the perspectives of the potential end-users of such toolkit materials.

methodsWe conducted 15 semi-structured interviews with school, childcare, local health jurisdiction, air quality, and school district personnel regarding sensor use for wildfire smoke response. Interviews included sharing PM

resultsThree major themes were identified by organizing complementary codes together: (1) Low-cost sensors are useful despite data quality limitations, (2) Low-cost sensor data can inform decision-making to protect children in school and childcare settings, and (3) There are feasibility and public perception-related barriers to using low-cost sensors.

conclusionsInterview responses provided practical implications for toolkit development, including demonstrating a need for toolkits that allow a variety of sensor preferences. In addition, participants expected to have a wide range of available time for monitoring, budget for sensors, and decision-making types. Finally, interview responses revealed a need for toolkits to address sensor uses outside of activity decisions, especially assessment of ventilation and filtration.

Indexed as

Air PollutantsAir PollutionWildfiresChildChild CareDecision MakingEnvironmental MonitoringHumansParticulate MatterSchoolsSmokeAir PollutantsParticulate MatterSmokeIndoor air qualityInterviewsLow-cost sensorsParticulate matterSchoolsWildfire smoke

Identifiers

PMID37932665
PMCPMC10626666
OpenAlexW4388412982

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.