Health impact metrics for air pollution management strategies
Clicks: 161
ID: 98189
2015
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Popular Article
30.0
/100
161 views
14 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
PopularRanked #141 of 157 articles by views in Environment international
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 157 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Health impact assessments (HIAs) inform policy and decision making by providing information regarding future health concerns, and quantitative HIAs now are being used for local and urban-scale projects. HIA results can be expressed using a variety of metrics that differ in meaningful ways, and guidance is lacking with respect to best practices for the development and use of HIA metrics. This study reviews HIA metrics pertaining to air quality management and presents evaluative criteria for their selection and use. These are illustrated in a case study where PM2.5 concentrations are lowered from 10 to 8 μg/m3 in an urban area of 1.8 million people. Health impact functions are used to estimate the number of premature deaths, unscheduled hospitalizations and other morbidity outcomes. The most common metric in recent quantitative HIAs has been the number of cases of adverse outcomes avoided. Other metrics include time-based measures, e.g., disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), monetized impacts, functional-unit based measures, e.g., benefits per ton of emissions reduced, and other economic indicators, e.g., cost-benefit ratios. These metrics are evaluated by considering their comprehensiveness, the spatial and temporal resolution of the analysis, how equity considerations are facilitated, and the analysis and presentation of uncertainty. In the case study, the greatest number of avoided cases occurs for low severity morbidity outcomes, e.g., asthma exacerbations (n = 28,000) and minor-restricted activity days (n = 37,000); while DALYs and monetized impacts are driven by the severity, duration and value assigned to a relatively low number of premature deaths (n = 190 to 230 per year). The selection of appropriate metrics depends on the problem context and boundaries, the severity of impacts, and community values regarding health. The number of avoided cases provides an estimate of the number of people affected, and monetized impacts facilitate additional economic analyses useful to policy analysis. DALYs are commonly used as an aggregate measure of health impacts and can be used to compare impacts across studies. Benefits per ton metrics may be appropriate when changes in emissions rates can be estimated. To address community concerns and HIA objectives, a combination of metrics is suggested. Keywords: Health impact assessment, Air quality management, Health metrics, Disability-adjusted life years, Monetized impacts
| Reference Key |
martenies2015healthenvironment
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Martenies, Sheena E.;Wilkins, Donele;Batterman, Stuart A.; |
| Journal | Environment international |
| Year | 2015 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.