Hongtai Huang

Environmental pollution exposure during pregnancy has been identified as a risk factor for preterm birth. Most studies have evaluated exposures individually and in limited study populations. We examined the associations between several environmental exposures, both individually and cumulatively, and risk of preterm birth in Fresno County, California. We also evaluated early (< 34 weeks) and spontaneous preterm birth. We used the Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool and linked hospital discharge records by census tract from 2009 to 2012. The environmental factors included air pollution, drinking water contaminants, pesticides, hazardous waste, traffic exposure and others. Social factors, including area-level socioeconomic status (SES) and race/ethnicity were also evaluated as potential modifiers of the relationship between pollution and preterm birth. In our study of 53,843 births, risk of preterm birth was associated with higher exposure to cumulative pollution scores and drinking water contaminants. Risk of preterm birth was twice as likely for those exposed to high versus low levels of pollution. An exposure-response relationship was observed across the quintiles of the pollution burden score. The associations were stronger among early preterm births in areas of low SES. In Fresno County, we found multiple pollution exposures associated with increased risk for preterm birth, with higher associations among the most disadvantaged. This supports other evidence finding environmental exposures are important risk factors for preterm birth, and furthermore the burden is higher in areas of low SES. This data supports efforts to reduce the environmental burden on pregnant women.

Citizen science provides quantitative results to support environmental health assessments (EHAs), but standardized approaches do not currently exist to translate findings into actionable solutions. The emergence of low-cost portable sensor technologies and proliferation of publicly available datasets provides unparalleled access to supporting evidence; yet data collection, analysis, interpretation, visualization, and communication are subjective approaches that must be tailored to a decision-making audience capable of improving environmental health. A decade of collaborative efforts and two citizen science projects contributed to three lessons learned and a set of frequently asked questions (FAQs) that address the complexities of environmental health and interpersonal relations often encountered in citizen science EHAs. Each project followed a structured step-by-step process in order to compare and contrast methods and approaches. These lessons and FAQs provide advice to translate citizen science research into actionable solutions in the context of a diverse range of environmental health issues and local stakeholders.

The goal of this review is to identify cumulative modeling methods used to evaluate combined effects of exposures to environmental chemicals and social stressors. The specific review question is: What are the existing quantitative methods used to examine the cumulative impacts of exposures to environmental chemical and social stressors on health?