↓ Skip to main content

Effect of Portable Air Filtration Systems on Personal Exposure to Fine Particulate Matter and Blood Pressure Among Residents in a Low-Income Senior Facility: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Internal Medicine, October 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
20 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
91 X users
facebook
7 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
72 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 Mendeley
Title
Effect of Portable Air Filtration Systems on Personal Exposure to Fine Particulate Matter and Blood Pressure Among Residents in a Low-Income Senior Facility: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Published in
JAMA Internal Medicine, October 2018
DOI 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.3308
Pubmed ID
Authors

Masako Morishita, Sara D Adar, Jennifer D'Souza, Rosemary A Ziemba, Robert L Bard, Catherine Spino, Robert D Brook

Abstract

Fine particulate matter (smaller than 2.5 μm) (PM2.5) air pollution is a major global risk factor for cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality. Few studies have tested the benefits of portable air filtration systems in urban settings in the United States. To investigate the effectiveness of air filtration at reducing personal exposures to PM2.5 and mitigating related CV health effects among older adults in a typical US urban location. This randomized, double-blind crossover intervention study was conducted from October 21, 2014, through November 4, 2016, in a low-income senior residential building in Detroit, Michigan. Forty nonsmoking older adults were enrolled, with daily CV health outcome and PM2.5 exposure measurements. Participants were exposed to the following three 3-day scenarios separated by 1-week washout periods: unfiltered air (sham filtration), low-efficiency (LE) high-efficiency particulate arrestance (HEPA)-type filtered air, and high-efficiency (HE) true-HEPA filtered air using filtration systems in their bedroom and living room. The primary outcome was brachial blood pressure (BP). Secondary outcomes included aortic hemodynamics, pulse-wave velocity, and heart rate variability. Exposures to PM2.5 were measured in the participants' residences and by personal monitoring. The 40 participants had a mean (SD) age of 67 (8) years (62% men). Personal PM2.5 exposures were significantly reduced by air filtration from a mean (SD) of 15.5 (10.9) μg/m3 with sham filtration to 10.9 (7.4) μg/m3 with LE fitration and 7.4 (3.3) μg/m3 with HE filtration. Compared with sham filtration, any filtration for 3 days decreased brachial systolic and diastolic BP by 3.2 mm Hg (95% CI, -6.1 to -0.2 mm Hg) and 1.5 mm Hg (95% CI, -3.3 to 0.2 mm Hg), respectively. A continuous decrease occurred in systolic and diastolic BP during the 3-day period of LE filtration, with a mean of 3.4 mm Hg (95% CI, -6.8 to -0.1 mm Hg) and 2.2 mm Hg (95% CI, -4.2 to -0.3 mm Hg), respectively. For HE filtration, systolic and diastolic BP decreased by 2.9 mm Hg (95% CI, -6.2 to 0.5 mm Hg) and 0.8 mm Hg (95% CI, -2.8 to 1.2 mm Hg), respectively. Most secondary outcomes were not significantly improved. Results of this study showed that short-term use of portable air filtration systems reduced personal PM2.5 exposures and systolic BP among older adults living in a typical US urban location. The use of these relatively inexpensive systems is potentially cardioprotective against PM2.5 exposures and warrants further research. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03334565.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 91 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 120 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 11%
Student > Master 11 9%
Lecturer 6 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 19 16%
Unknown 50 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 15%
Environmental Science 11 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Sports and Recreations 4 3%
Other 18 15%
Unknown 56 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 223. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 February 2024.
All research outputs
#172,481
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Internal Medicine
#954
of 11,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,436
of 354,551 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Internal Medicine
#16
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,638 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 84.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 354,551 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.