1. ^aLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, USA
2. ^bDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health, Rollins School of Public Health of Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
3. ^cUS Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA

Correspondence: Dr Thomas E. McKone, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, One Cyclotron Road, Mail stop 90R3058, Berkeley, CA 95720, USA. Tel.: +1 510 642 8771; Fax: +1 510 486 6658; E-mail: temckone@lbl.gov

Received 23 August 2007; Accepted 4 January 2008; Published online 2 April 2008.

Abstract

Understanding and quantifying outdoor and indoor sources of human exposure are essential but often not adequately addressed in health effect studies for air pollution. Air pollution epidemiology, risk assessment, health tracking, and accountability assessments are examples of health effect studies that require but often lack adequate exposure information. Recent advances in exposure modeling along with better information on time–activity and exposure factor data provide us with unique opportunities to improve the assignment of exposures for both future and ongoing studies linking air pollution to health impacts. In September 2006, scientists from the US Environmental Protection Agency and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention along with scientists from the academic community and state health departments convened a symposium on air pollution exposure and health to identify, evaluate, and improve current approaches for linking air pollution exposures to disease. This manuscript presents the key issues, challenges, and recommendations identified by the exposure working group, who used case studies of particulate matter, ozone, and toxic air-pollutant exposure to evaluate health effects for air pollution. One of the overarching lessons of this workshop is that obtaining better exposure information for these different health effect studies requires both goal setting for what is needed and mapping out the transition pathway from current capabilities for meeting these goals. Meeting our long-term goals requires definition of incremental steps that provide useful information for the interim and move us toward our long-term goals. Another overarching theme among the three different pollutants and the different health study approaches is the need for integration among alternate exposure-assessment approaches. For example, different groups may advocate exposure indicators, biomonitoring, mapping methods (GIS), modeling, environmental media monitoring, and/or personal exposure modeling. However, emerging research reveals that the greatest progress comes from integration among two or more of these efforts.