361 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31783241)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. A land use regression model using machine learning and locally developed low cost particulate matter sensors in Uganda.
Coker ES; Amegah AK; Mwebaze E; Ssematimba J; Bainomugisha E
Environ Res; 2021 Aug; 199():111352. PubMed ID: 34043968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. Deployment, Calibration, and Cross-Validation of Low-Cost Electrochemical Sensors for Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Oxides, and Ozone for an Epidemiological Study.
Zuidema C; Schumacher CS; Austin E; Carvlin G; Larson TV; Spalt EW; Zusman M; Gassett AJ; Seto E; Kaufman JD; Sheppard L
Sensors (Basel); 2021 Jun; 21(12):. PubMed ID: 34205429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Analysing the performance of low-cost air quality sensors, their drivers, relative benefits and calibration in cities-a case study in Sheffield.
Munir S; Mayfield M; Coca D; Jubb SA; Osammor O
Environ Monit Assess; 2019 Jan; 191(2):94. PubMed ID: 30671683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Five Years of Accurate PM
Robinson DL; Goodman N; Vardoulakis S
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2023 Nov; 20(23):. PubMed ID: 38063557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Assessment and statistical modeling of the relationship between remotely sensed aerosol optical depth and PM2.5 in the eastern United States.
Paciorek CJ; Liu Y;
Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2012 May; (167):5-83; discussion 85-91. PubMed ID: 22838153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. Assessing the value of complex refractive index and particle density for calibration of low-cost particle matter sensor for size-resolved particle count and PM2.5 measurements.
Huang CH; He J; Austin E; Seto E; Novosselov I
PLoS One; 2021; 16(11):e0259745. PubMed ID: 34762676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Estimating hourly PM
Lu Y; Giuliano G; Habre R
Environ Res; 2021 Apr; 195():110653. PubMed ID: 33476665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Personal Exposure Estimates via Portable and Wireless Sensing and Reporting of Particulate Pollution.
Agrawaal H; Jones C; Thompson JE
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2020 Jan; 17(3):. PubMed ID: 32013139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Calibration methodology of low-cost sensors for high-quality monitoring of fine particulate matter.
Aix ML; Schmitz S; Bicout DJ
Sci Total Environ; 2023 Sep; 889():164063. PubMed ID: 37201842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Evaluating the Performance of Low-Cost Air Quality Monitors in Dallas, Texas.
Khreis H; Johnson J; Jack K; Dadashova B; Park ES
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2022 Jan; 19(3):. PubMed ID: 35162669
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Low-cost sensors as an alternative for long-term air quality monitoring.
Liu X; Jayaratne R; Thai P; Kuhn T; Zing I; Christensen B; Lamont R; Dunbabin M; Zhu S; Gao J; Wainwright D; Neale D; Kan R; Kirkwood J; Morawska L
Environ Res; 2020 Jun; 185():109438. PubMed ID: 32276167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
