Search

High-resolution, high-quality exposure modeling is critical for assessing the health effects of ambient PM2.5 in epidemiological studies. Using sparse regulatory PM2.5 measurements as principal model inputs may result in two issues in exposure prediction: (1) they may affect the models’ accuracy in predicting PM2.5 spatial distribution; (2) the internal validation based on these measurements may not reliably reflect the model performance at locations of interest (e.g., a cohort’s residential locations). In this study, we used the PM2.5 measurements from a publicly available commercial low-cost PM2.5 network, PurpleAir, with an external validation dataset at the residential locations of a representative sample of participants from the Adult Changes in Thought - Air Pollution (ACT-AP) study, to improve the accuracy of exposure prediction at the cohort participant locations. We also proposed a metric based on principal component analysis (PCA) - the PCA distance - to assess the similarity between monitor and cohort locations to guide monitor deployment and data selection. The analysis was based on a spatiotemporal modeling framework with 51 “gold-standard” monitors and 58 PurpleAir monitors for model development, as well as 105 home monitors at the cohort locations for model validation, in the Puget Sound region of Washington State from June 2017 to March 2019. After including calibrated PurpleAir measurements as part of the dependent variable, the external spatiotemporal validation R2 and root-mean-square error, RMSE, for two-week concentration averages improved from 0.84 and 2.22 μg/m3 to 0.92 and 1.63 μg/m3, respectively. The external spatial validation R2 and RMSE for long-term averages over the modeling period improved from 0.72 and 1.01 μg/m3 to 0.79 and 0.88 μg/m3, respectively. The exposure predictions incorporating PurpleAir measurements demonstrated sharper urban-suburban concentration gradients. The PurpleAir monitors with shorter PCA distances improved the model’s prediction accuracy more substantially than the monitors with longer PCA distances, supporting the use of this similarity metric.

Estimating ground-level ozone concentrations is crucial to study the adverse health effects of ozone exposure and better understand the impacts of ground-level ozone on biodiversity and vegetation. However, few studies have attempted to use satellite retrieved ozone as an indicator given their low sensitivity in the boundary layer. Using the Troposphere Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI)'s total ozone column together with the ozone profile information retrieved by the Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI), as TROPOMI ozone profile product has not been released, we developed a machine learning model to estimate daily maximum 8-hour average ground-level ozone concentration at 10 km spatial resolution in California. In addition to satellite parameters, we included meteorological fields from the High-Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) system at 3 km resolution and land-use information as predictors. Our model achieved an overall 10-fold cross-validation (CV) R2 of 0.84 with root mean square error (RMSE) of 0.0059 ppm, indicating a good agreement between model predictions and observations. Model predictions showed that the suburb of Los Angeles Metropolitan area had the highest ozone levels, while the Bay Area and the Pacific coast had the lowest. High ozone levels are also seen in Southern California and along the east side of the Central Valley. TROPOMI data improved the estimate of extreme values when compared to a similar model without it. Our study demonstrates the feasibility and value of using TROPOMI data in the spatiotemporal characterization of ground-level ozone concentration.