Citizen science in environmental health research: A comparison with conventional approaches and creation of a guidance tool issued from the LILAS initiative.

CONTEXT: Public interest for citizen science (CS) in environmental health is growing. The goals of environmental health research projects are diverse, as are the methods used to reach these goals. Opportunities for greater implication of the civil society and related challenges differ at each step of such projects. These methodological aspects need to be widely shared and understood by all stakeholders. The LILAS initiative (acronym for "application of citizen science approaches such as LIving LAbS to research on environmental exposures and chronic risks") aimed to 1) favor a mutual understanding of the main issues and research methods in environmental health, of their stakes for different actors, but also of the requirements, strengths and limitations of these methods and to 2) identify expected benefits and points of attention related to stronger degrees of participation as part of environmental health research projects. METHODS: The LILAS initiative gathered institutional researchers, academics and civil society representatives interested in environmental exposures. Five meetings allowed to collectively identify different types of environmental health research studies and reflect about the benefits, limitations, and methodological issues related to the introduction of growing citizen participation as part of such studies. An analytic table matrix summarizing these aspects was co-created and filled by participants, as a tool devoted to help stakeholders with the definition of future CS research projects in environmental health. RESULTS: For different fields of research (e.g.: studies for assessment of environmental exposures, interventions on these exposures, quantitative risk assessment, epidemiological studies), the matrix lists expected benefits for various stakeholders, the fundamental principles of research methods and related practical constraints, but also advantages and limitations related to the use of CS or conventional research approaches. CONCLUSION: The LILAS initiative allowed to develop a tool which provides consolidated grounds for the co-creation of research projects on environmental exposures involving CS.

Health Impacts of Active Transportation in Europe.

Policies that stimulate active transportation (walking and bicycling) have been related to heath benefits. This study aims to assess the potential health risks and benefits of promoting active transportation for commuting populations (age groups 16-64) in six European cities. We conducted a health impact assessment using two scenarios: increased cycling and increased walking. The primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality related to changes in physical activity level, exposure to fine particulate matter air pollution with a diameter <2.5 µm, as well as traffic fatalities in the cities of Barcelona, Basel, Copenhagen, Paris, Prague, and Warsaw. All scenarios produced health benefits in the six cities. An increase in bicycle trips to 35% of all trips (as in Copenhagen) produced the highest benefits among the different scenarios analysed in Warsaw 113 (76-163) annual deaths avoided, Prague 61 (29-104), Barcelona 37 (24-56), Paris 37 (18-64) and Basel 5 (3-9). An increase in walking trips to 50% of all trips (as in Paris) resulted in 19 (3-42) deaths avoided annually in Warsaw, 11(3-21) in Prague, 6 (4-9) in Basel, 3 (2-6) in Copenhagen and 3 (2-4) in Barcelona. The scenarios would also reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the six cities by 1,139 to 26,423 (metric tonnes per year). Policies to promote active transportation may produce health benefits, but these depend of the existing characteristics of the cities. Increased collaboration between health practitioners, transport specialists and urban planners will help to introduce the health perspective in transport policies and promote active transportation.

Grass pollen counts, air pollution levels and allergic rhinitis severity.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the relation between allergic rhinitis severity and airborne pollen in combination with air pollutants. OBJECTIVE: To model the risk of suffering from severe seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) as a function of both pollen count and air pollution levels in a large nationwide sample of patients whose SAR was diagnosed by a physician and confirmed by skin prick test positivity or specific immunolglobulin E to common aeroallergens. METHODS: The severity of SAR symptoms was estimated with the Symptomatic Global Score (SGS) among 36,397 patients suffering from an untreated and uncomplicated SAR between May and August 2004 in metropolitan France. Patients who had an SGS in the upper third quartile were classified as suffering from severe SAR. A multilevel model relating SAR severity, pollen and air pollution was used to take into account the hierarchical data structure. RESULTS: 18.9% of the 17,567 urban patients retained for the analysis suffered from severe rhinitis. At the Lag0 (day of the visit), a rise of 60 grass pollen grains/m(3) increased the risk of suffering from a severe SAR form by 8% in the multileveled model after adjusting for potential confounders and air pollution levels. Results were also confirmed in the subsample of individuals with documented sensitization to grass pollen. CONCLUSION: Grass pollen count aggravated SAR in terms of symptoms in our nationwide sample. These findings confirm the need for proper treatment and preventive measures in SAR patients sensitized to grass pollen.

Improving health through policies that promote active travel: a review of evidence to support integrated health impact assessment.

BACKGROUND: Substantial policy changes to control obesity, limit chronic disease, and reduce air pollution emissions, including greenhouse gasses, have been recommended. Transportation and planning policies that promote active travel by walking and cycling can contribute to these goals, potentially yielding further co-benefits. Little is known, however, about the interconnections among effects of policies considered, including potential unintended consequences. OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: We review available literature regarding health impacts from policies that encourage active travel in the context of developing health impact assessment (HIA) models to help decision-makers propose better solutions for healthy environments. We identify important components of HIA models of modal shifts in active travel in response to transport policies and interventions. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Policies that increase active travel are likely to generate large individual health benefits through increases in physical activity for active travelers. Smaller, but population-wide benefits could accrue through reductions in air and noise pollution. Depending on conditions of policy implementations, risk tradeoffs are possible for some individuals who shift to active travel and consequently increase inhalation of air pollutants and exposure to traffic injuries. Well-designed policies may enhance health benefits through indirect outcomes such as improved social capital and diet, but these synergies are not sufficiently well understood to allow quantification at this time. CONCLUSION: Evaluating impacts of active travel policies is highly complex; however, many associations can be quantified. Identifying health-maximizing policies and conditions requires integrated HIAs.

Can we use fixed ambient air monitors to estimate population long-term exposure to air pollutants? The case of spatial variability in the Genotox ER study.

Associations between average total personal exposures to PM2.5, PM10, and NO2 and concomitant outdoor concentrations were assessed within the framework of the Genotox ER study. It was carried out in four French metropolitan areas (Grenoble, Paris, Rouen, and Strasbourg) with the participation, in each site, of 60-90 nonsmoking volunteers composed of two groups of equal size (adults and children) who carried the personal Harvard Chempass multipollutant sampler during 48 h along two different seasons ("hot" and "cold"). In each center, volunteers were selected so as to live (home and work/school) in three different urban sectors contrasted in terms of air pollution (one highly exposed to traffic emissions, one influenced by local industrial sources, and a background urban environment). In parallel to personal exposure measurements, a fixed ambient air monitoring station surveyed the same pollutants in each local sector. A linear regression model was accommodated where the dependent pollutant-specific variable was the difference, for each subject, between the average ambient air concentrations over 48 h and the personal exposure over the same period. The explanatory variables were the metropolitan areas, the three urban sectors, season, and age group. While average exposures to particles were underestimated by outdoor monitors, in almost all cities, seasons, and age groups, differences were lower for NO2 and, in general, in the other direction. Relationships between average total personal exposures and ambient air levels varied across metropolitan areas and local urban sectors. These results suggest that using ambient air concentrations to assess average exposure of populations, in epidemiological studies of long-term effects or in a risk assessment setting, calls for some caution. Comparison of personal exposures to PM or NO2 with ambient air levels is inherently disturbed by indoor sources and activities patterns. Discrepancies between measurement devices and local and regional sources of pollution may also strongly influence how the ambient air concentrations relate to population exposure. Much attention should be given to the selection of the most appropriate monitoring sites according to the study objectives.

Short-term effects of low-level air pollution on respiratory health of adults suffering from moderate to severe asthma.

Only a few studies have been carried out on the health effects of air pollution on patients suffering from severe asthma. We wanted to test the sensitivity of these patients to Paris air pollution. During 13 months, 60 severe asthmatics (62- female; mean age 55 years) were monitored by their physician, who filled in a follow-up form at each consultation and reported any asthma attacks. Daily levels of SO(2), PM10, NO(2), and O(3) were provided by the air quality network. Statistical analysis (generalized estimating equation models that accounted for autocorrelation of responses, temporal, meteorological, and aerobiological variables, and some individual characteristics) revealed significant associations between PM10, O(3), and incident asthma attacks. Odds Ratio (OR) for an increase of 10 microg/m(3) of PM10 was 1.41; 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.16; 1.71]. An increase of 10 microg/m(3) of O(3) was significantly associated with asthma attacks; OR=1.20; 95% CI [1.03; 1.41]. These relations were observed after a delay between exposure and asthma attacks of 3 to 5 days for PM10 and 2 days for O(3), and they tended to differ according to atopic status. The results of our study suggest that ambient Paris levels of PM10 and O(3) affected health of severe asthmatics, despite their treatment.

Effects of air pollution on adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Few studies have been conducted on the effects of air pollution on patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). During a 14-mo period, 39 Parisian adults with severe COPD were monitored by their physicians. Daily levels of 4 air pollutants were provided by an urban air-quality network. Exacerbation of COPD was associated only with ozone (O3) (odds ratio [OR] = 1.44 for a 10-microg/m3 increase in O3; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.14, 1.82), with a lag of 2-3 days. The effect of O3 was greater in patients whose carbon dioxide pressure (PaCO2) was higher than 43 mm Hg (OR = 1.83; 95% CI = 1.36, 2.47) vs. those with a lower PaCO2 (OR = 1.26; 95% CI = 0.90, 1.77). The effect of O3 was unchanged, regardless of the maintenance medications used. The only air pollutant to which patients with severe COPD were particularly sensitive was O3.