Size distribution of airborne particles controls outcomes of epidemiological studies

Roy Harrison, Chiara Giorio, David Beddows, M Dall'Osto

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

35 Citations (Scopus)


Epidemiological studies typically using wide size range mass metrics (e.g. PM(10)) have demonstrated associations between airborne particulate matter and several adverse health outcomes. This approach ignores the fact that mass concentration may not correlate with regional lung dose, unlike the case of trace gases. When using measured particle size distributions as the basis for calculating regional lung dose, PM(10) mass concentration is found to be a good predictor of the mass dose in all regions of the lung, but is far less predictive of the surface area and particle number dose. On the other hand, measurements of particle number do not well predict mass dose, indicating that the chosen particle metric is likely to determine the health outcomes detectable by an epidemiological study. Consequently, epidemiological studies using mass metrics (PM(2.5) and PM(10)) may fail to recognise important health consequences of particulate matter exposure, leading to an underestimate of the public health consequences of particle exposure.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)289-293
Number of pages5
JournalScience of the Total Environment
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2010


Dive into the research topics of 'Size distribution of airborne particles controls outcomes of epidemiological studies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this