Assessing the Influence of Vehicular Traffic-Associated Atmospheric Pollutants on Pulmonary Function Using Spirometry and Impulse Oscillometry in Healthy Participants: Insights from Bogotá, 2020–2021

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this manuscript, authors looked at the pulmonary functions in participants using bicycling, bus, and minivan in specific routes. There is no significant difference in pulmonary functions between different routes. Although mean PM2.5 and BC concentrations, and pulmonary functions are not different between three different transportation methods. However, Figure 2-5 shows a lot of variation within each parameter. Therefore, correlation analysis between air quality parameters, and pulmonary function parameters can provide better understanding on the role of air pollution on respiratory health.

In result section, mean of all the analyzed parameters is given, authors should also provide standard deviation of these parameters.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Quality of english language is good in most of the manuscript, except few instances:

Line 243, sentence is starting with 'is'.

Lines 28 and 38, in introduction section are confusing and can be improved.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,
We appreciate your valuable comments and suggestions to improve our manuscript. We are pleased to inform you that we have incorporated the standard deviation data you requested in the results section, which enriches the analysis and allows for a better understanding of the variability of the studied parameters.

Regarding your suggestion to perform an additional correlation analysis between air quality parameters and pulmonary functions, we respectfully explain that, in our opinion, this analysis would not add significant value to the study. Our main findings indicate that there are no significant differences in pulmonary functions between different transportation routes, despite the observed variations in PM2.5 and BC concentrations. We believe that this result itself is relevant and provides valuable information on the relationship between air pollution and respiratory health in the specific context of our study.

Also, we have made the suggested changes in the typos and English corrections

We hope this explanation is clear and that you can understand our reasoning. Again, we appreciate your comments and are confident that, with the incorporation of the standard deviation data, our manuscript will be further strengthened.

Sincerely,

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Only 19 references were used. The subject is a very current one and a lot of research has been done on it. The number of references should be increased and the introduction and discussion section should be developed with new dated sources (after 2000).

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We sincerely appreciate your detailed review and comments on our work. We have made modifications to the introduction and discussion sections, as you suggested, incorporating updated sources from after the year 2000 to enrich the content of the article.

Regarding the number of references used, we understand your concern. While we recognize that the topic is of great relevance and has been the subject of numerous investigations, it is important to note that despite the growing interest in the relationship between impulse oscillometry parameters and changes in airway resistance, the scientific literature presents a limited number of studies that evaluate these changes in healthy populations. This scarcity of specific work in healthy populations restricts the availability of additional citations to support our findings in the discussion.

Nevertheless, we have conducted a thorough analysis of the available literature and have included the most relevant and up-to-date references that address the topic in question. Our objective has been to provide a solid foundation for our study, considering the limited availability of specific research in healthy populations that addresses the relationship between impulse oscillometry and changes in airway resistance.

Sincerely,

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper entitled “Assessing the Influence of Vehicular Traffic-Associated Atmospheric Pollutants on Pulmonary Function Using Spirometry and Impulse Oscillometry in Healthy Participants: Insights from Bogotá, 2020-2021" by Almentero et al deals with the effects of exposure to road traffic on the respiratory system, using methods such as spirometry and oscillometry

 

The quality of this article is very good and the various points covered in the paper are very clear and well referenced.

The only remark that could be made and would require some comment would be the small number of participants in this study. There were only 10 participants, so the different groups are very small.

Nevertheless, this rather exploratory study provides a good basis for other, larger-scale studies.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,
We sincerely appreciate your detailed review and positive feedback on our paper titled "Assessing the Influence of Vehicular Traffic-Associated Atmospheric Pollutants on Pulmonary Function Using Spirometry and Impulse Oscillometry in Healthy Participants: Insights from Bogotá, 2020-2021"

We are pleased to learn that the quality of the article has been well received and that the points covered have been deemed clear and well-referenced.
Regarding your observation about the small sample size, we understand the significance of this aspect in interpreting the results. We acknowledge that the sample size of 10 participants may limit the generalizability, which are outlined below.

"This study has several limitations and flaws that should be acknowledged. Firstly, while this study presents several limitations and shortcomings that warrant acknowledgment, it is important to note that the small sample size utilized may not adequately represent the broader healthy adult population in the city, thereby restricting the generalizability of the results. As a result, the study may be underpowered to detect significant variations in impulse oscillometry values linked to various transportation routes or modes

Secondly, we did not consider night-time exposure to air pollutants, which could potentially affect the pre-travel oscillometry R5 and R20/R5 values. Future studies should account for variations in exposure during different times of the day to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of respiratory function changes.

Thirdly, the assessments of PM2.5 and black carbon exposure during the journey were conducted in a minivan. Although efforts were made to minimize external air flow by keeping the windows closed, it was challenging to completely control the exposure to air pollutants. This may introduce some variability in the results and should be taken into account when interpreting the findings.

Furthermore, it is important to acknowledge the limitations associated with the uti-lization of oscillometry and spirometry techniques in this study. The equations utilized to evaluate these parameters were originally developed using data from non-Latin American populations, and as such, there is a potential for bias in the interpretation of the results. It is crucial to consider the potential variations in respiratory physiology and lung function characteristics among different ethnic and geographical populations, which may impact the accuracy and applicability of these equations in the context of the present study. Fur-ther research specifically focusing on Latin American populations is warranted to address these limitations and provide more accurate and context-specific reference values for os-cillometry and spirometry measurements.

Lastly, the study design did not include long-term follow-up. Future research should consider incorporating longitudinal studies to evaluate the impact of air pollution on res-piratory health over extended periods of time."

 

Thank you once again for your time and consideration.