Indoor environment quality (IEQ) factors: Difference between revisions

From Opasnet
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 81: Line 81:
smoking|mental problems||inhalation|yes/no|OR|8 (0.4 - 15.6)||Packer et al. 1994
smoking|mental problems||inhalation|yes/no|OR|8 (0.4 - 15.6)||Packer et al. 1994
social life|health problems||other|<21|OR|11.8 (5.8 - 17.8)||Packer et al. 1994
social life|health problems||other|<21|OR|11.8 (5.8 - 17.8)||Packer et al. 1994
alcohol|health problems||other|yes/no|OR|0.1 (5.3 - 5.5)||Packer et al. 1994
</t2b>
</t2b>
Note 1 [[ERF of indoor dampness on respiratory health effects]]
Note 1 [[ERF of indoor dampness on respiratory health effects]]

Revision as of 09:53, 31 January 2013



Question

What established or possible indoor environment quality (IEQ) factors exist? What kind of dose-responses have been defined for them?

Answer

Indoor environment quality (IEQ) factors: Difference between revisions(-)
ObsExposure metricResponseResponse metricExposure routeExposure unitERF parameterERFSignificanceDescription/Reference
1Visible dampness and/or mold or mold odorRespiratory health effectRespiratory symptoms and diseasesInhalationyes/noORseveral, see Note 1Note 1
2Dampness and/or moldDepressionInhalation, Other?Note 2
3Dampness and/or moldMental health problemsInhalation, Other?Note 2
4Dampness and/or moldSelf-assessed health poorerInhalation, Other?Note 2
5Dampness and/or moldMental health problemsInhalationyes/noOR1,76 (1,17-2,66)Hopton and Hunt (1996)
6Chronic illness Mental health problemsnoyes/noOR1,99 (1,32-3,02)Hopton and Hunt (1996)
7Living with children under 16 y Mental health problemsnoyes/noOR1,75 (1,15-2,68)Hopton and Hunt (1996)
8Living in a low income household Mental health problemsnoyes/noOR1,61 (1,06-2,44)Hopton and Hunt (1996)
9Respondent unemployed Mental health problemsnoyes/noOR1,55 (0,99-2,42)Hopton and Hunt (1996)
10Wood smokeRespiratory health effectRespiratory symptoms and infectionsInhalationNote 3, Note 4
11Wood smokeIrritation of eyes and mucosa
12Wood smokeRespiratory health effectAsthma aggravatingInhalation
13Wood smokeOdour problemsInhalation
14Wood smokeComfort of housingDecreased comfort of housing
15Wood smokeChronic infectionsInhalation
16Wood smokeCancerInhalation
17Tobacco smokeRespiratory health effectRespiratory symptoms and infectionsInhalation
18Tobacco smokeIrritation of eyes and mucosa
19Tobacco smokeRespiratory health effectAsthma aggravating
20Tobacco smokeOdour problemsInhalation
21Tobacco smokeComfort of housingDecreased comfort of housing
22Tobacco smokeChronic infectionsInhalation
23Tobacco smokeCancer
24VOCsirritation symptoms etc.
25CO2headache, tiredness etc.
26COheadache, tiredness etc.
27Insufficient air exchangeHeadache
28Insufficient air exchangeTiredness
29Insufficient air exchangeDecreased ability to concentrate
30Insufficient air exchangeFeeling of fug
31Thermal conditions; heatTiredness
32Thermal conditions; heatDecreased ability to concentrate
33Thermal conditions; heatIncreased respiratory symptoms
34Thermal conditions; heatFeeling of dryness
35Thermal conditions; heatComfort of housingDecreased comfort of housing
36Thermal comfort (draught or cold)Mental health problemsNote 2
37Thermal comfort (heat or cold)DepressionNote 2
38Thermal comfort (heat or cold; general perception of thermal problems)Self-assessed health poorerNote 2
39Thermal conditions (cold)Feeling of draught
40Thermal conditions (cold)Comfort of housingDecreased comfort of housing
41NoiseHearing injury
42NoiseSleep disturbance
43NoiseStress
44NoiseComfort of housingDecreased comfort of housing
45Proximity to trafficMortality(?)
46RadonLung cancerNote 5
47Relative humidity
48PMmortalityNote 3
49PMchronic bronchitis
50PMlung cancer
51Reduced space (house/flat)DepressionNote 2
52Reduced space (house/flat)Mental health problemsNote 2
53Reduced space (house/flat)Self-assessed health poorerNote 2
54GardenDepressionNote 2
55Floor levelMental health problemsNote 2
56OvercrowdingMental health problemsNote 2
57OvercrowdingSelf assessed health poorerNote 2
58Sensory IAQVarious health and well-being parameters
59Maternal employmentMaltreatment of ChildrenOtheryes/noOR2.82 (1.59 - 5.00)Sidebotham et al. 2002
60No. of house moves in previous 5 yearsMaltreatment of ChildrenOther2-3OR1.32 (0.77 - 2.27)Sidebotham et al. 2002
61No. of house moves in previous 5 yearsMaltreatment of ChildrenOther4 or moreOR2.81 (1.59 - 4.96)Sidebotham et al. 2002
62AccomodationMaltreatment of ChildrenOtherovercrowedOR2.16Sidebotham et al. 2002
63AccomodationMaltreatment of ChildrenOtherCouncilOR7.65Sidebotham et al. 2002
64AccomodationMaltreatment of ChildrenOtherRentedOR4.47Sidebotham et al. 2002
65Social Network ScoreMaltreatment of ChildrenOther<21OR3.09 (1.84 - 5.19)Sidebotham et al. 2002
66Parental unemployementMaltreatment of ChildrenOtheryes/noOR2.33Sidebotham et al. 2002
67Car useMaltreatment of ChildrenOtheryes/noOR2.23Sidebotham et al. 2002
68house dampnessheadacheinhalation, otheryes/noOR8.7 (8.1 - 9.3)Packer et al. 1994
69smokingmental problemsinhalationyes/noOR8 (0.4 - 15.6)Packer et al. 1994
70social lifehealth problemsother<21OR11.8 (5.8 - 17.8)Packer et al. 1994
71alcoholhealth problemsotheryes/noOR0.1 (5.3 - 5.5)Packer et al. 1994

Note 1 ERF of indoor dampness on respiratory health effects

Note 2 WP6 well-being report (password-protected)

Note 3 ERF of PM2.5 on mortality in general population

Note 4 Concentration-response to PM2.5

Note 5 Health impact of radon in Europe

Rationale

An example for RefTaq functionality: Pope et al. (2002) [1]

Juho Kutvonen and Salla Mönkkönen Hopton and Hunt (1996) [2]

Isabell Rumrich and Stefania Caporaso Sidebotham et al. (2002) [3]

Soroush Majlesi and Adnan Ahmad Packer et al. (1994) [4]

Precision and Plausability of Hopton and Hunt (1996)

- Reporting bias: Perhaps ít´s difficult to use subjective data due to reporting bias. This is because people may answer in different ways or they don´t answer at all. In addition, people experience household conditions differently.

- Possible confounding variables were controlled.

- Selection bias: The sample is clearly not representative of the general population and therefore the analysis focuses on differences within the sample. Thus it´s worth considering if the results can be generalized to whole population.

Precision and Plausability of Sidebotham et al. (2002)

- maltreatment: registration for physical injury, neglect, sexual abuse, emotional abuse

- social class: no allowance for nonworking mothers, no parental social class allocated for single mothers

- nature of relationship with child maltreatment is complex (confounder, cultural values, etc)

- income is not measured directly, but car ownership as a proxy indicator and receipt of welfare payment

- controlling for social factors

- large amount of prospectively collect data

- participation is lower among the maltreated group

- risk of social bias and no way of measuring the effect of such bias

Dependencies

Formula

See also

Keywords

References

  1. *Pope CA III, Burnett RT, Thun MJ, Calle EE, Krewski D, Ito K & Thurston KD (2002). Lung cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality, and long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution. JAMA 287(9), 1132-1141.
  2. *Hopton J.L. and Hunt S.M.(1996). Housing conditions and mental health in a disadvantaged area in Scotland. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 1996;50:56-61
  3. *Sidebotham et al. (2002). Child maltreatment in the “Children of the Nineties:” deprivation, class, and social networks in a UK sample.Child Abuse and Neglect 2002;26:1243-1259
  4. *Packer et al. Damp housing and adult health: results from a lifestyle study in Worcester, England.Journal of epidemiology and community health 1994;48(6):555–559

Related files

<mfanonymousfilelist></mfanonymousfilelist>

Indoor environment quality (IEQ) factors. Opasnet . [1]. Accessed 29 Dec 2024.