334 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32276167)
1. 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]
2. The London low emission zone baseline study.
Kelly F; Armstrong B; Atkinson R; Anderson HR; Barratt B; Beevers S; Cook D; Green D; Derwent D; Mudway I; Wilkinson P;
Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2011 Nov; (163):3-79. PubMed ID: 22315924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. The impact of the congestion charging scheme on air quality in London. Part 1. Emissions modeling and analysis of air pollution measurements.
Kelly F; Anderson HR; Armstrong B; Atkinson R; Barratt B; Beevers S; Derwent D; Green D; Mudway I; Wilkinson P;
Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2011 Apr; (155):5-71. PubMed ID: 21830496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Deployment of networked low-cost sensors and comparison to real-time stationary monitors in New Delhi.
Prakash J; Choudhary S; Raliya R; Chadha TS; Fang J; George MP; Biswas P
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2021 Nov; 71(11):1347-1360. PubMed ID: 33591244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An experimental application of laser-scattering sensor to estimate the traffic-induced PM
Liu X; Zhao Q; Zhu S; Peng W; Yu L
Environ Monit Assess; 2020 Jun; 192(7):450. PubMed ID: 32578056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. A distributed network of low-cost continuous reading sensors to measure spatiotemporal variations of PM2.5 in Xi'an, China.
Gao M; Cao J; Seto E
Environ Pollut; 2015 Apr; 199():56-65. PubMed ID: 25618367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Six sources mainly contributing to the haze episodes and health risk assessment of PM
Xu X; Zhang H; Chen J; Li Q; Wang X; Wang W; Zhang Q; Xue L; Ding A; Mellouki A
Ecotoxicol Environ Saf; 2018 Dec; 166():146-156. PubMed ID: 30265878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Field Evaluation of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensors in Beijing.
Mei H; Han P; Wang Y; Zeng N; Liu D; Cai Q; Deng Z; Wang Y; Pan Y; Tang X
Sensors (Basel); 2020 Aug; 20(16):. PubMed ID: 32764476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Field performance of a low-cost sensor in the monitoring of particulate matter in Santiago, Chile.
Tagle M; Rojas F; Reyes F; Vásquez Y; Hallgren F; Lindén J; Kolev D; Watne ÅK; Oyola P
Environ Monit Assess; 2020 Feb; 192(3):171. PubMed ID: 32040639
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Application and evaluation of a low-cost PM sensor and data fusion with CMAQ simulations to quantify the impacts of prescribed burning on air quality in Southwestern Georgia, USA.
Huang R; Lal R; Qin M; Hu Y; Russell AG; Odman MT; Afrin S; Garcia-Menendez F; O'Neill SM
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2021 Jul; 71(7):815-829. PubMed ID: 33914671
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Using a network of lower-cost monitors to identify the influence of modifiable factors driving spatial patterns in fine particulate matter concentrations in an urban environment.
Rose Eilenberg S; Subramanian R; Malings C; Hauryliuk A; Presto AA; Robinson AL
J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol; 2020 Nov; 30(6):949-961. PubMed ID: 32764710
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effects of Road Traffic on the Accuracy and Bias of Low-Cost Particulate Matter Sensor Measurements in Houston, Texas.
Oluwadairo T; Whitehead L; Symanski E; Bauer C; Carson A; Han I
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2022 Jan; 19(3):. PubMed ID: 35162113
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
