Study of the Suitability of a Personal Exposure Monitor to Assess Air Quality
Halah E. Aljofi,
Thomas J. Bannan,
Michael Flynn,
James Evans,
David Topping,
Emily Matthews,
Sebastian Diez,
Pete Edwards,
Hugh Coe,
Daniel R. Brison,
Martie van Tongeren,
Edward D. Johnstone,
Andrew Povey
Affiliations
Halah E. Aljofi
Department of Environmental Health, Institute for Research & Medical Consultations (IRMC), Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University (IAU), Dammam 314441, Saudi Arabia
Thomas J. Bannan
Department of Earth and Environmental Science, Centre for Atmospheric Science, School of Natural Sciences, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
Michael Flynn
Department of Earth and Environmental Science, Centre for Atmospheric Science, School of Natural Sciences, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
James Evans
Department of Earth and Environmental Science, Centre for Atmospheric Science, School of Natural Sciences, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
David Topping
Department of Earth and Environmental Science, Centre for Atmospheric Science, School of Natural Sciences, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
Emily Matthews
Department of Earth and Environmental Science, Centre for Atmospheric Science, School of Natural Sciences, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
Sebastian Diez
Centro de Investigación en Tecnologías para la Sociedad, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago 7610658, Chile
Pete Edwards
Wolfson Atmospheric Chemistry Laboratories, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK
Hugh Coe
Department of Earth and Environmental Science, Centre for Atmospheric Science, School of Natural Sciences, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
Daniel R. Brison
Maternal and Fetal Health Research Centre, Division of Developmental Biology and Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester M13 9WL, UK
Martie van Tongeren
Centre for Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Centre, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
Edward D. Johnstone
Department of Reproductive Medicine, Saint Mary’s Hospital, Central Manchester NHS Trust, Manchester M13 PWL, UK
Andrew Povey
Centre for Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Centre, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
Low-cost personal exposure monitors (PEMs) to measure personal exposure to air pollution are potentially promising tools for health research. However, their adoption requires robust validation. This study evaluated the performance of twenty-one Plume Lab Flow2s (PLFs) by comparing its air pollutant measurements, particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 μm or less (PM2.5), 10 μm or less (PM10), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2), against several high-quality air pollution monitors under field conditions (at indoor, outdoor, and roadside locations). Correlation and regression analysis were used to evaluate measurements obtained by different PLFs against reference instrumentation. For all measured pollutants, the overall correlation coefficient between the PLFs and the reference instruments was often weak (r 2.5, but not for PM10 and NO2 concentration. During periods of particularly higher pollution, 11 PLF tools showed stronger regression results (R2 values > 0.5) with one-hour and 9 PLF units with one-minute time interval. Results show that the PLF cannot be used robustly to determine high and low exposure to poor air. Therefore, the use of PLFs in research studies should be approached with caution if data quality is important to the research outputs.