Michael D. Garber, Anaïs Teyton, Marta M. Jankowska, Gabriel Carrasco-Escobar, David Rojas-Rueda, Antony Barja-Ingaruca, Tarik Benmarhnia
{"title":"加利福尼亚州圣迭戈以居住地为基础的热暴露测量方法与以流动性为基础的热暴露测量方法的比较","authors":"Michael D. Garber, Anaïs Teyton, Marta M. Jankowska, Gabriel Carrasco-Escobar, David Rojas-Rueda, Antony Barja-Ingaruca, Tarik Benmarhnia","doi":"10.1038/s41370-024-00715-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Background</h3><p>Heat can vary spatially within an urban area. Individual-level heat exposure may thus depend on an individual’s day-to-day travel patterns (also called mobility patterns or activity space), yet heat exposure is commonly measured based on place of residence.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Objective</h3><p>In this study, we compared measures assessing exposure to two heat indicators using place of residence with those defined considering participants’ day-to-day mobility patterns.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>Participants (<i>n</i> = 599; aged 35-80 years old [mean =59 years]) from San Diego County, California wore a GPS device to measure their day-to-day travel over 14-day intervals between 2014-10-17 and 2017-10-06. We measured exposure to two heat indicators (land-surface temperature [LST] and air temperature) using an approach considering their mobility patterns and an approach considering only their place of residence. We compared participant mean and maximum exposure values from each method for each indicator.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>The overall mobility-based mean LST exposure (34.7 °C) was almost equivalent to the corresponding residence-based mean (34.8 °C; mean difference in means = −0.09 °C). Similarly, the mean difference between the overall mobility-based mean air temperature exposure (19.2 °C) and the corresponding residence-based mean (19.2 °C) was negligible (−0.02 °C). Meaningful differences emerged, however, when comparing maximums, particularly for LST. The mean mobility-based maximum LST was 40.3 °C compared with a mean residence-based maximum of 35.8 °C, a difference of 4.51 °C. The difference in maximums was considerably smaller for air temperature (mean = 0.40 °C; SD = 1.41 °C) but nevertheless greater than the corresponding difference in means.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Impact</h3><p>As the climate warms, assessment of heat exposure both at and away from home is important for understanding its health impacts. We compared two approaches to estimate exposure to two heat measures (land surface temperature and air temperature). The first approach only considered exposure at home, and the second considered day-to-day travel. Considering the average exposure estimated by each approach, the results were almost identical. Considering the maximum exposure experienced (specific definition in text), the differences between the two approaches were more considerable, especially for land surface temperature.</p>","PeriodicalId":15684,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is home where the heat is? comparing residence-based with mobility-based measures of heat exposure in San Diego, California\",\"authors\":\"Michael D. Garber, Anaïs Teyton, Marta M. Jankowska, Gabriel Carrasco-Escobar, David Rojas-Rueda, Antony Barja-Ingaruca, Tarik Benmarhnia\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41370-024-00715-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Background</h3><p>Heat can vary spatially within an urban area. Individual-level heat exposure may thus depend on an individual’s day-to-day travel patterns (also called mobility patterns or activity space), yet heat exposure is commonly measured based on place of residence.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Objective</h3><p>In this study, we compared measures assessing exposure to two heat indicators using place of residence with those defined considering participants’ day-to-day mobility patterns.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Methods</h3><p>Participants (<i>n</i> = 599; aged 35-80 years old [mean =59 years]) from San Diego County, California wore a GPS device to measure their day-to-day travel over 14-day intervals between 2014-10-17 and 2017-10-06. We measured exposure to two heat indicators (land-surface temperature [LST] and air temperature) using an approach considering their mobility patterns and an approach considering only their place of residence. We compared participant mean and maximum exposure values from each method for each indicator.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Results</h3><p>The overall mobility-based mean LST exposure (34.7 °C) was almost equivalent to the corresponding residence-based mean (34.8 °C; mean difference in means = −0.09 °C). Similarly, the mean difference between the overall mobility-based mean air temperature exposure (19.2 °C) and the corresponding residence-based mean (19.2 °C) was negligible (−0.02 °C). Meaningful differences emerged, however, when comparing maximums, particularly for LST. The mean mobility-based maximum LST was 40.3 °C compared with a mean residence-based maximum of 35.8 °C, a difference of 4.51 °C. The difference in maximums was considerably smaller for air temperature (mean = 0.40 °C; SD = 1.41 °C) but nevertheless greater than the corresponding difference in means.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Impact</h3><p>As the climate warms, assessment of heat exposure both at and away from home is important for understanding its health impacts. We compared two approaches to estimate exposure to two heat measures (land surface temperature and air temperature). The first approach only considered exposure at home, and the second considered day-to-day travel. Considering the average exposure estimated by each approach, the results were almost identical. Considering the maximum exposure experienced (specific definition in text), the differences between the two approaches were more considerable, especially for land surface temperature.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15684,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-024-00715-5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-024-00715-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Is home where the heat is? comparing residence-based with mobility-based measures of heat exposure in San Diego, California
Background
Heat can vary spatially within an urban area. Individual-level heat exposure may thus depend on an individual’s day-to-day travel patterns (also called mobility patterns or activity space), yet heat exposure is commonly measured based on place of residence.
Objective
In this study, we compared measures assessing exposure to two heat indicators using place of residence with those defined considering participants’ day-to-day mobility patterns.
Methods
Participants (n = 599; aged 35-80 years old [mean =59 years]) from San Diego County, California wore a GPS device to measure their day-to-day travel over 14-day intervals between 2014-10-17 and 2017-10-06. We measured exposure to two heat indicators (land-surface temperature [LST] and air temperature) using an approach considering their mobility patterns and an approach considering only their place of residence. We compared participant mean and maximum exposure values from each method for each indicator.
Results
The overall mobility-based mean LST exposure (34.7 °C) was almost equivalent to the corresponding residence-based mean (34.8 °C; mean difference in means = −0.09 °C). Similarly, the mean difference between the overall mobility-based mean air temperature exposure (19.2 °C) and the corresponding residence-based mean (19.2 °C) was negligible (−0.02 °C). Meaningful differences emerged, however, when comparing maximums, particularly for LST. The mean mobility-based maximum LST was 40.3 °C compared with a mean residence-based maximum of 35.8 °C, a difference of 4.51 °C. The difference in maximums was considerably smaller for air temperature (mean = 0.40 °C; SD = 1.41 °C) but nevertheless greater than the corresponding difference in means.
Impact
As the climate warms, assessment of heat exposure both at and away from home is important for understanding its health impacts. We compared two approaches to estimate exposure to two heat measures (land surface temperature and air temperature). The first approach only considered exposure at home, and the second considered day-to-day travel. Considering the average exposure estimated by each approach, the results were almost identical. Considering the maximum exposure experienced (specific definition in text), the differences between the two approaches were more considerable, especially for land surface temperature.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology (JESEE) aims to be the premier and authoritative source of information on advances in exposure science for professionals in a wide range of environmental and public health disciplines.
JESEE publishes original peer-reviewed research presenting significant advances in exposure science and exposure analysis, including development and application of the latest technologies for measuring exposures, and innovative computational approaches for translating novel data streams to characterize and predict exposures. The types of papers published in the research section of JESEE are original research articles, translation studies, and correspondence. Reported results should further understanding of the relationship between environmental exposure and human health, describe evaluated novel exposure science tools, or demonstrate potential of exposure science to enable decisions and actions that promote and protect human health.