229 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28012666)
1. Ambient and laboratory evaluation of a low-cost particulate matter sensor.
Kelly KE; Whitaker J; Petty A; Widmer C; Dybwad A; Sleeth D; Martin R; Butterfield A
Environ Pollut; 2017 Feb; 221():491-500. PubMed ID: 28012666
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Long-term field evaluation of the Plantower PMS low-cost particulate matter sensors.
Sayahi T; Butterfield A; Kelly KE
Environ Pollut; 2019 Feb; 245():932-940. PubMed ID: 30682749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Performance evaluation of ozone and particulate matter sensors.
DeWitt HL; Crow WL; Flowers B
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2020 Mar; 70(3):292-306. PubMed ID: 31961265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. On-field test and data calibration of a low-cost sensor for fine particles exposure assessment.
Jiang Y; Zhu X; Chen C; Ge Y; Wang W; Zhao Z; Cai J; Kan H
Ecotoxicol Environ Saf; 2021 Mar; 211():111958. PubMed ID: 33503545
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Development of a calibration chamber to evaluate the performance of low-cost particulate matter sensors.
Sayahi T; Kaufman D; Becnel T; Kaur K; Butterfield AE; Collingwood S; Zhang Y; Gaillardon PE; Kelly KE
Environ Pollut; 2019 Dec; 255(Pt 1):113131. PubMed ID: 31521992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Summary of PM
Long RW; Urbanski SP; Lincoln E; Colón M; Kaushik S; Krug JD; Vanderpool RW; Landis MS
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2023 Apr; 73(4):295-312. PubMed ID: 36716322
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Feasibility of using low-cost portable particle monitors for measurement of fine and coarse particulate matter in urban ambient air.
Han I; Symanski E; Stock TH
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2017 Mar; 67(3):330-340. PubMed ID: 27690287
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Design and evaluation of a portable PM
Tryner J; Quinn C; Windom BC; Volckens J
Environ Sci Process Impacts; 2019 Aug; 21(8):1403-1415. PubMed ID: 31389929
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Development and field validation of a community-engaged particulate matter air quality monitoring network in Imperial, California, USA.
Carvlin GN; Lugo H; Olmedo L; Bejarano E; Wilkie A; Meltzer D; Wong M; King G; Northcross A; Jerrett M; English PB; Hammond D; Seto E
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2017 Dec; 67(12):1342-1352. PubMed ID: 28829718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Field and Laboratory Evaluations of the Low-Cost Plantower Particulate Matter Sensor.
Levy Zamora M; Xiong F; Gentner D; Kerkez B; Kohrman-Glaser J; Koehler K
Environ Sci Technol; 2019 Jan; 53(2):838-849. PubMed ID: 30563344
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Calibration of low-cost particulate matter sensors: Model development for a multi-city epidemiological study.
Zusman M; Schumacher CS; Gassett AJ; Spalt EW; Austin E; Larson TV; Carvlin G; Seto E; Kaufman JD; Sheppard L
Environ Int; 2020 Jan; 134():105329. PubMed ID: 31783241
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effects of aerosol particle size on the measurement of airborne PM
Oluwadairo T; Whitehead L; Symanski E; Bauer C; Carson A; Han I
Environ Monit Assess; 2022 Jan; 194(2):56. PubMed ID: 34989887
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Sources of error and variability in particulate matter sensor network measurements.
Zuidema C; Stebounova LV; Sousan S; Thomas G; Koehler K; Peters TM
J Occup Environ Hyg; 2019 Aug; 16(8):564-574. PubMed ID: 31251121
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Improving accuracy of air pollution exposure measurements: Statistical correction of a municipal low-cost airborne particulate matter sensor network.
Considine EM; Reid CE; Ogletree MR; Dye T
Environ Pollut; 2021 Jan; 268(Pt B):115833. PubMed ID: 33120139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Low-Cost Sensor Performance Intercomparison, Correction Factor Development, and 2+ Years of Ambient PM
Raheja G; Nimo J; Appoh EK; Essien B; Sunu M; Nyante J; Amegah M; Quansah R; Arku RE; Penn SL; Giordano MR; Zheng Z; Jack D; Chillrud S; Amegah K; Subramanian R; Pinder R; Appah-Sampong E; Tetteh EN; Borketey MA; Hughes AF; Westervelt DM
Environ Sci Technol; 2023 Jul; 57(29):10708-10720. PubMed ID: 37437161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Improving the correlations of ambient tapered element oscillating microbalance PM2.5 data and SHARP 5030 Federal Equivalent Method in Ontario: a multiple linear regression analysis.
Sofowote U; Su Y; Bitzos MM; Munoz A
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2014 Jan; 64(1):104-14. PubMed ID: 24620408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Evaluation of a new low-cost particle sensor as an internet-of-things device for outdoor air quality monitoring.
Roberts FA; Van Valkinburgh K; Green A; Post CJ; Mikhailova EA; Commodore S; Pearce JL; Metcalf AR
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2022 Nov; 72(11):1219-1230. PubMed ID: 35759771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Performance assessment of NOVA SDS011 low-cost PM sensor in various microenvironments.
Božilov A; Tasić V; Živković N; Lazović I; Blagojević M; Mišić N; Topalović D
Environ Monit Assess; 2022 Jul; 194(9):595. PubMed ID: 35857115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors for Indoor Air Monitoring during COVID-19 Lockdown.
Kaliszewski M; Włodarski M; Młyńczak J; Kopczyński K
Sensors (Basel); 2020 Dec; 20(24):. PubMed ID: 33353048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Characterizing Determinants of Near-Road Ambient Air Quality for an Urban Intersection and a Freeway Site.
Frey HC; Grieshop AP; Khlystov A; Bang JJ; Rouphail N; Guinness J; Rodriguez D; Fuentes M; Saha P; Brantley H; Snyder M; Tanvir S; Ko K; Noussi T; Delavarrafiee M; Singh S
Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2022 Sep; 2022(207):1-73. PubMed ID: 36314577
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
