Unintended impacts of the Open Streets program on noise complaints in New York City.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, several cities allocated more public spaces for physical activity and recreation instead of road transport through Open Streets. This policy locally reduces traffic and provides experimental testbeds for healthier cities. However, it may also generate unintended impacts. For instance, Open Streets may impact the levels of exposure to environmental noise but there are no studies assessing these unintended impacts. OBJECTIVES: Using noise complaints from New York City (NYC) as a proxy of annoyance caused by environmental noise, we estimated associations at the census tract level between same-day proportion of Open Streets in a census tract and noise complaints in NYC. METHODS: Using data from summer 2019 (pre-implementation) and summer 2021 (post-implementation), we fit regressions to estimate the association between census tract-level proportion of Open Streets and daily noise complaints, with random effects to account for within-tract correlation and natural splines to allow non-linearity in the estimated association. We accounted for temporal trends and other potential confounders, such as population density and poverty rate. RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, daily street/sidewalk noise complaints were nonlinearly associated with an increasing proportion of Open Streets. Specifically, compared to the mean proportion of Open Streets in a census tract (0.11%), 5% of Open Streets had a 1.09 (95% CI: 0.98, 1.20) and 10% had a 1.21 (95% CI: 1.04, 1.42) times higher rate of street/sidewalk noise complaints. Our results were robust to the choice of data source for identifying Open Streets. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that Open Streets in NYC may be linked to an increase in street/sidewalk noise complaints. These results highlight the necessity to reinforce urban policies with a careful analysis for potential unintended impacts to optimize and maximize the benefits of these policies.

Long-Term Fine Particulate Matter Concentrations and Prevalence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2: Differential Relationships by Socioeconomic Status Among Pregnant Individuals in New York City.

We aimed to determine whether long-term ambient concentrations of fine particulate matter (particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 µm (PM2.5)) were associated with increased risk of testing positive for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among pregnant individuals who were universally screened at delivery and whether socioeconomic status (SES) modified this relationship. We used obstetrical data collected from New-York Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York, New York, between March and December 2020, including data on Medicaid use (a proxy for low SES) and COVID-19 test results. We linked estimated 2018-2019 PM2.5 concentrations (300-m resolution) with census-tract-level population density, household size, income, and mobility (as measured by mobile-device use) on the basis of residential address. Analyses included 3,318 individuals; 5% tested positive for COVID-19 at delivery, 8% tested positive during pregnancy, and 48% used Medicaid. Average long-term PM2.5 concentrations were 7.4 (standard deviation, 0.8) µg/m3. In adjusted multilevel logistic regression models, we saw no association between PM2.5 and ever testing positive for COVID-19; however, odds were elevated among those using Medicaid (per 1-µg/m3 increase, odds ratio = 1.6, 95% confidence interval: 1.0, 2.5). Further, while only 22% of those testing positive showed symptoms, 69% of symptomatic individuals used Medicaid. SES, including unmeasured occupational exposures or increased susceptibility to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) due to concurrent social and environmental exposures, may explain the increased odds of testing positive for COVID-19 being confined to vulnerable pregnant individuals using Medicaid.

Quantifying diurnal changes in NO2 due to COVID-19 stay-at-home orders in New York City.

Introduction: Policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, such as the NY on Pause stay-at-home order (March 22 - June 8, 2020), substantially reduced traffic and traffic-related air pollution (TRAP) in New York City (NYC). We evaluated the magnitude of TRAP decreases and examined the role of modifying factors such as weekend/weekday, road proximity, location, and time-of-day. Methods: Hourly nitrogen dioxide (NO2) concentrations from January 1, 2018 through June 8, 2020 were obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency's Air Quality System for all six hourly monitors in the NYC area. We used an interrupted time series design to determine the impact of NY on Pause on NO2 concentrations, using a mixed effects model with random intercepts for monitor location, adjusted for meteorology and long-term trends. We evaluated effect modification through stratification. Results: NO2 concentrations decreased during NY on Pause by 19% (-3.2 ppb, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.5, -3.0), on average, compared to pre-Pause time trends. We found no evidence for modification by weekend/weekday, but greater decreases in NO2 at non-roadside monitors and weak evidence for modification by location. For time-of-day, we found the largest decreases for 5 am (27%, -4.5 ppb, 95% CI: -5.7, -3.3) through 7 am (24%, -4.0 ppb, 95% CI: -5.2, -2.8), followed by 6 pm and 7 pm (22%, -3.7 ppb, 95% CI: -4.8, -2.6 and 22%, -4.8, -2.5, respectively), while the smallest decreases occurred at 11 pm and 1 am (both: 11%, -1.9 ppb, 95% CI: -3.1, -0.7). Conclusion: NY on Pause's impact on TRAP varied greatly diurnally. Decreases during early morning and evening time periods are likely due to decreases in traffic. Our results may be useful for planning traffic policies that vary by time of day, such as congestion tolling policies.

Methods for Evaluating Environmental Health Impacts at Different Stages of the Policy Process in Cities.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Evaluating the environmental health impacts of urban policies is critical for developing and implementing policies that lead to more healthy and equitable cities. This article aims to (1) identify research questions commonly used when evaluating the health impacts of urban policies at different stages of the policy process, (2) describe commonly used methods, and (3) discuss challenges, opportunities, and future directions. RECENT FINDINGS: In the diagnosis and design stages of the policy process, research questions aim to characterize environmental problems affecting human health and to estimate the potential impacts of new policies. Simulation methods using existing exposure-response information to estimate health impacts predominate at these stages of the policy process. In subsequent stages, e.g., during implementation, research questions aim to understand the actual policy impacts. Simulation methods or observational methods, which rely on experimental data gathered in the study area to assess the effectiveness of the policy, can be applied at these stages. Increasingly, novel techniques fuse both simulation and observational methods to enhance the robustness of impact evaluations assessing implemented policies. The policy process consists of interdependent stages, from inception to end, but most reviewed studies focus on single stages, neglecting the continuity of the policy life cycle. Studies assessing the health impacts of policies using a multi-stage approach are lacking. Most studies investigate intended impacts of policies; focusing also on unintended impacts may provide a more comprehensive evaluation of policies.

Powering Research through Innovative Methods for Mixtures in Epidemiology (PRIME) Program: Novel and Expanded Statistical Methods.

Humans are exposed to a diverse mixture of chemical and non-chemical exposures across their lifetimes. Well-designed epidemiology studies as well as sophisticated exposure science and related technologies enable the investigation of the health impacts of mixtures. While existing statistical methods can address the most basic questions related to the association between environmental mixtures and health endpoints, there were gaps in our ability to learn from mixtures data in several common epidemiologic scenarios, including high correlation among health and exposure measures in space and/or time, the presence of missing observations, the violation of important modeling assumptions, and the presence of computational challenges incurred by current implementations. To address these and other challenges, NIEHS initiated the Powering Research through Innovative methods for Mixtures in Epidemiology (PRIME) program, to support work on the development and expansion of statistical methods for mixtures. Six independent projects supported by PRIME have been highly productive but their methods have not yet been described collectively in a way that would inform application. We review 37 new methods from PRIME projects and summarize the work across previously published research questions, to inform methods selection and increase awareness of these new methods. We highlight important statistical advancements considering data science strategies, exposure-response estimation, timing of exposures, epidemiological methods, the incorporation of toxicity/chemical information, spatiotemporal data, risk assessment, and model performance, efficiency, and interpretation. Importantly, we link to software to encourage application and testing on other datasets. This review can enable more informed analyses of environmental mixtures. We stress training for early career scientists as well as innovation in statistical methodology as an ongoing need. Ultimately, we direct efforts to the common goal of reducing harmful exposures to improve public health.