- Full citation and abstract?
- Lin, Shao, Rena Jones, Cristian Pantea, Halûk Özkaynak, S. Trivikrama Rao, Syni-An Hwang, and Valerie C. Garcia. "Impact of NOx Emissions Reduction Policy on Hospitalizations for Respiratory Disease in New York State." J Expos Sci Environ Epidemiol Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology 23.1 (2012): 73-80. Nature. Web. 26 Sept. 2015.
- “To date, only a limited number of studies have examined the impact of ambient pollutant policy on respiratory morbidities. This accountability study examined the effect of a regional pollution control policy, namely, the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) nitrogen oxides (NOx) Budget Trading Program (NBP), on respiratory health in New York State (NYS). Time-series analysis using generalized additive models was applied to assess changes in daily hospitalizations for respiratory diseases in NYS after the implementation of the NBP policy. Respiratory end points in the summers during the baseline period (1997--2000) were compared with those during the post-intervention period (2004--2006). Stratified analyses were also conducted to examine whether health impacts of the NBP differed by socio-demographic, regional, or clinical characteristics. Following the implementation of EPA’s NBP policy, there were significant reductions in mean ozone levels (2% to 9%) throughout NYS. After adjusting for time-varying variables, PM2.5 concentration, and meteorological factors, significant post-intervention declines in respiratory admissions were observed in the Central (10.18, 95% confidence interval (CI): 14.18, 6.01), Lower Hudson (11.05, 95% CI: 16.54, 5.19), and New York City Metro regions (5.71, 95% CI: 7.39, 4.00), consistent with wind trajectory patterns. Stratified analyses suggest that admissions for asthma, chronic airway obstruction, among those 5--17 years old, self-payers, Medicaid-covered, and rural residents declined the most post-NBP. This study suggests that the NOx control policy may have had a positive impact on both air pollution levels statewide and respiratory health in some NYS regions. However, the effect varied by disease subgroups, region, and socio-demographic characteristics.”
- Where do the authors work, and what are their areas of expertise? Note any other publications by the authors with relevance to the 6Cities project.
- Dr. Shao Lin is a research associate professor at UAlbany’s School of Public Health. He has his PhD in Epidemiology from University of North Carolina. His primary area of specialization is environmental impacts on public health, especially air/water quality. He has written several papers on envirohealth impacts in NYS, most notably surrounding 9/11 and it’s impact on the health of people who were in the area. Even though most of his work (that I can find at least) is from the early 2000’s , his work could be a huge asset to the 6Cities project (especially NYC and Albany).
- Dr. Syni-An Hwang is the head of the Bureau of Environmental and Educational Epidemiology at the NYS DOH.
- Dr. Rena Jones received her PhD in Epidemiology from UAlbany and is now at Excelsior College.
- What are the main findings or arguments presented in the article or report?
- The main argument in this paper is that the passing of the NOx Budget Trading Program in 2003, had a positive impact on the respiratory health of New Yorkers in the Central, Adirondacks, Lower Hudson, and NYC parts of the state. In the three locations excluding the Adriondacks, both ozone levels and respiratory admissions to hospitals decreased. While there were different levels of improvement based on location and socio-demographic characteristics, there was a general trend of increased air quality resulting in fewer hospital visits.
- For the Upper Hudson (includes the Capital Region), a decrease in ozone levels were recorded, but an increase in respiratory admissions followed. The authors gave no real explanation for this event, but did point out that overall, NYS experienced lower summer ozone levels.
- Describe at least three ways that the argument is supported
- Look Above.
- What three (or more) quotes capture the message of the article or report?
- Of all the factors potentially affecting respiratory hospitalization that we could readily evaluate, air quality, especially ozone concentration, remains the most plausible reason for the decline in acute respiratory events. This study found consistent declines in statewide ambient ozone concentrations of up to 9% following EPA actions to mitigate transport of ozone and its precursors into NYS.
- We found that the impact of the NBP on health was complex and region specific, for example, significant reductions were observed in respiratory admissions in half of NYS regions, including the Central, Lower Hudson, and New York City Metropolitan regions (ranging from 6% to 11%) after the NBP.
- The NBP was a multi-state effort from federal/regional policy to reduce NOx emissions in the northeastern states and transport from neighboring states. The public health significance of such a policy is likely to be reflected in multiple health endpoints, including respiratory and cardiovascular disease, and possibly others
- What were the methods, tools and/or data used to produce the claims or arguments made in the article or report?
- For air quality data, the researchers used data that was collected from air monitoring stations run by the DEC or EPA. The health data was collected through a DOH data based called The Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) that aims to provide health data for research such as this. The researchers then used various statistical methods and modeling techniques to compile their information.
- How (if at all) are health disparities or other equity issues addressed in the article or report?
- One of the more interesting results of this study was finding that Hispanics and poorer people had relatively large decreases in respiratory hospital admissions since the implementation of the Budget Trading Program (-20% and -40% respectively). This reinforces the idea that poor air quality affects people of lower SES more than the wealthy.
- Where has this article or report been referenced or discussed? (In some journals, you can see this in a sidebar.)
- This research article has only been referenced by four other research papers, which is not surprising given that the paper was only written in 2013 and that the paper has such a novel approach. It is one of the rare papers that aims to quantify the public health impact of a continuous federal mandate for outdoor air pollution.
- Can you learn anything from the article or report’s bibliography that tells us something about how the article or report was produced?
- From the bibliography, I can tell that much more diverse sources were used for the air quality aspect of the paper as opposed to the health effect aspect. The number of air quality citations are at least twice that of the health effect citations.
- What three points, details or references from the text did you follow up on to advance your understanding of how air pollution science has been produced and used in governance and education in different settings?
- After reading from the text I obviously wanted to know more about the scope/effects of the NBP and I was pleasantly surprised to find that the EPA has a website on the program and what it has/hopes to achieve. I will definitely be spending some time here.
Loading...