The DOI matches its Crossref record.
PM10Ozone, and Hospital Admissions for the Elderly in Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota
Abstract
Several recent studies have reported associations between airborne particles and/or ozone and hospital admissions for respiratory disease. PM10 has rarely been used as the particle exposure measure, however. This study examined whether such an association could be seen in Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota, which has daily monitoring data for PM10. Data on hospital admissions in persons aged 65 y and older were obtained from Medicare records for the years 1986 through 1989. Daily counts of admissions, by admit date, were computed for pneumonia (ICD9 480-487) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (ICD9 490-496). Classification was by discharge diagnosis. Daily air pollution data from all monitoring stations for ozone and PM10 in Minneapolis-St. Paul were obtained, and the daily average for each pollutant was computed. An average of approximately six pneumonia admissions and two admissions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease occurred each day. Poisson regression analysis was used to control for time trends, seasonal fluctuations, and weather. PM10 was a risk factor for pneumonia admissions (relative risk [RR] = 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.33-1.02) and COPD admissions (RR = 1.57, 95% CI = 2.06-1.20). Ozone was also associated with pneumonia admissions (RR = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.36-0.97). The relative risks are for an increase of 100 micrograms/m3 in daily PM10 and 50 ppb in daily ozone concentration. Several alternative methods for controlling for seasonal patterns and weather were used, including nonparametric regression techniques. The results were not sensitive to the methods. When days exceeding the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for either pollutant were excluded, the association remained for both pneumonia (RR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.34-1.03 for PM10, and RR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.41-0.99 for ozone) and COPD (RR = 1.54, 95% CI = 2.06-1.16 for PM10).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Review of Epidemiological Evidence of Health Effects of Particulate Air Pollution
Pope, C. A., Dockery, D. W., & Schwartz, J. (1995) · Inhalation Toxicology · doi:10.3109/08958379509014267 · Cited by 833
Self-citationAdverse health effects of outdoor air pollutants
Curtis, L., Rea, W., Smith-Willis, P., Fenyves, E., & Pan, Y. (2006) · Environment International · doi:10.1016/j.envint.2006.03.012 · Cited by 579
Costa, D. L., & Dreher, K. L. (1997) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.97105s51053 · Cited by 522
Air Pollution and Respiratory Viral Infection
Ciencewicki, J., & Jaspers, I. (2007) · Inhalation Toxicology · doi:10.1080/08958370701665434 · Cited by 488
Major air pollutants and risk of COPD exacerbations: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Li, J., Sun, S., Tang, R., Qiu, H., Huang, Q., Mason, T., & Tian, L. (2016) · International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease · doi:10.2147/copd.s122282 · Cited by 283
Metadata
- Authors
- Schwartz, J.
- Venue
- Archives of Environmental Health: An International Journal
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1994-10
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 366-374
- ISSN
- 0003-9896 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1979881027
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 9.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: PM10Ozone, and Hospital Admissions for the Elderly in Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00039896.1994.9954989
- The paper
- Schwartz, J. (1994). PM10Ozone, and Hospital Admissions for the Elderly in Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota. Archives of Environmental Health: An International Journal. https://doi.org/10.1080/00039896.1994.9954989
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.