기관회원 [로그인]
소속기관에서 받은 아이디, 비밀번호를 입력해 주세요.
개인회원 [로그인]

비회원 구매시 입력하신 핸드폰번호를 입력해 주세요.
본인 인증 후 구매내역을 확인하실 수 있습니다.

회원가입
서지반출
사회경제수준에 따른 오존과 소아천식 관련 입원의 상관성 연구
[STEP1]서지반출 형식 선택
파일형식
@
서지도구
SNS
기타
[STEP2]서지반출 정보 선택
  • 제목
  • URL
돌아가기
확인
취소
  • 사회경제수준에 따른 오존과 소아천식 관련 입원의 상관성 연구
저자명
손지영,김호,김선영,이종태,Son. Ji-Young,Kim. Ho,Kim. Sun-Young,Lee. Jong-Tae
간행물명
Journal of preventive medicine and public health
권/호정보
2006년|39권 1호|pp.81-86 (6 pages)
발행정보
대한예방의학회
파일정보
정기간행물|
PDF텍스트
주제분야
기타
이 논문은 한국과학기술정보연구원과 논문 연계를 통해 무료로 제공되는 원문입니다.
서지반출

기타언어초록

Background: A number of studies have reported associations between the ambient air pollution concentrations and various health outcomes. Especially, ozone is well known for primary risk factor of asthma attacks. The results of a recent study indicate that the size of the effect on health outcomes due to air pollution varied according to several conditions, including age, gender, race and the socioeconomic status. Therefore, this study was conducted to examine the associations of ozone with the childhood asthma hospitalizations as stratified by the socioeconomic status (SES) at the community level in Seoul, Korea, 2002. Methods: SES at aggregated levels was measured on the basis of average regional health-insurance rate per citizen in the area. We applied the generalized additive model to analyze the effect of ozone on asthma after controlling for the potential confounding variables that were capable of influencing the results. Results: Our analysis showed that the number of children who were hospitalized for asthma increased as the SES of the residence area decreased. The estimated relative risks of hospitalization for asthma, as stratified by the SES of the community level, were 1.12 (95% confidence interval 1.00-1.25) in districts with the highest SES levels, 1.24 (95% CI=1.08-1.43) within the moderate SES levels, and 1.32 (95% CI=1.11-1.58) in the districts with the lowest SES levels. Conclusions: Our analysis showed that exposure to air pollution did not equally affect the health status of individuals. This suggests that not only the biological-sensitivity markers, but also the SES of the subjects should be considered as potentially confounding factors.