Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
were 0.46 (95% CI: 0.13, 0.78) and 0.97 (0.35, 1.59), respectively. Significant coefficients were also found for S (0.48; 95% CI: 0.27, 0.68), Cd (0.47; 0.17, 0.76), and Ni (0.17; 0.02, 0.32). Point estimates for calibration coefficients were all below one, indicating that using the nearest monitors as exposure surrogates would attenuate associations with health risks. The measurement error in component-wise analysis highlights the need for incorporating these calibration coefficients into future studies to adjust for such errors adequately.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: