In the original article, there was a wording error on the way that the reduction percentages of air pollutant concentrations were expressed. It is not a reduction percentage but a percentage of increase that would have been observed in the absence of lockdown.
A correction has been made to Discussion, “Summary of Findings,” first paragraph:
We replaced the following sentences: “The mean reduction in PM10 concentrations was 8.3%, with values ranging from−1.8 to 39.8% depending on the municipality. For NO2 concentrations, the mean reduction was 29.0%, with values ranging from 3.5 to 187.8% depending on the municipality.” by:
“The daily mean difference between the estimated PM10 level during lockdown and its reference (modeled concentrations without lockdown) was −8.3 μg.m−3. This difference was −2.1 μg.m−3 for NO2.”
In the original article, there was a mistake in Table 2 as published. The four columns entitled “Reduction percentage” were not defined. The corrected Table 2 appears below.
Table 2
| Strict Lockdown (A) | Gradual lifting (B) | Total period (A+B) | Annual | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (March 16 to May 11, 2020) | (May 11 to June 22, 2020) | (March 16 to June 22, 2020) | (July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020) | |||||
| Daily mean differences* [min; max] (μg.m-3) | Relative differences** [min; max] (%) | Daily mean differences* [min; max] (μg.m-3) | Relative differences** [min; max] (%) | Daily mean differences* [min; max] (μg.m-3) | Relative differences** [min; max] (%) | Daily mean differences* [min; max] (μg.m-3) | Relative differences** [min; max] (%) | |
| PM 10 | ||||||||
| Rural areas*** | −2.4 [−4.9; −0.1] |
12.4 [−1.1; 29.0] |
−0.4 [−1.6; 0.6] |
2.9 [−5.4; 11.0] |
−1.5 [−3.2; 0.1] |
8.3 [−1.8; 19.5] |
/**** | / |
| Sparsely populated urban areas*** | −2.4 [−4.6; −0.1] |
12.3 [−0.2; 26.1] |
−0.4 [−1.3; 0.4] |
2.7 [−3.9; 9.2] |
−1.5 [−3.0; 0.1] |
8.1 [−1.8; 16.9] |
/ | / |
| Populated urban areas*** | −2.4 [−4.7; −0.1] |
12.4 [−0.2; 25.7] |
−0.4 [−1.4; 0.4] |
2.5 [−3.9; 9.7] |
−1.5 [−3.0; 0.1] |
8.1 [−1.8; 16.6] |
/ | / |
| Highly populated urban areas*** | −2.7 [−8.6; −0.1] |
13.1 [−0.6; 44.9] |
−0.4 [−4.4; 0.7] |
2.5 [−7.1; 33.1] |
−1.7 [−6.7; 0.1] |
8.5 [−1.7; 39.8] |
/ | / |
| Metropolitan France |
−2.4
[−8.6; −0.1] |
12.5
[−1.1; 44.9] |
−0.4
[−4.4; 0.7] |
2.8
[−7.1; 33.1] |
−1.5
[−6.7; 0.1] |
8.3
[−1.8; 39.8] |
/ | / |
| NO 2 | ||||||||
| Rural areas | −3.0 [−12.8; −0.3] |
43.5 [6.9; 181.2] |
−0.5 [−5.6; 0.1] |
8.1 [−1.6; 99.1] |
−1.9 [−8.7; −0.2] |
28.1 [3.5; 121.7] |
−0.5 [−2.3; −0.04] |
7.6 [1.0; 32.9] |
| Sparsely populated urban areas | −3.5 [−11.8; −0.3] |
48.1 [7.7; 122.2] |
−0.6 [−4.8; 0.1] |
9.2 [−1.0; 78.5] |
−2.3 [−8.3; −0.2] |
31.2 [4.4; 97.8] |
−0.6 [−2.2; −0.05] |
8.4 [1.2; 26.4] |
| Populated urban areas | −3.8 [−10.7; −0.9] |
49.7 [15.2; 127.8] |
−0.7 [−3.6; 0.04] |
9.5 [−0.8; 43.0] |
−2.5 [−7.6; −0.6] |
32.2 [9.6; 89.9] |
−0.7 [−2.1; −0.2] |
8.7 [2.6; 24.3] |
| Highly populated urban areas | −5.1 [−30.8; −1.3] |
52.7 [21.4; 214.8] |
−1.0 [−19.6; −0.04] |
11.3 [−0.2; 150.3] |
−3.3 [−25.9; −0.8] |
34.7 [13.7; 186.8] |
−0.9 [−7.0; −0.2] |
9.4 [3.7; 50.5] |
| Metropolitan France |
−3.2
[−30.8; −0.3] |
44.7
[6.9; 214.8] |
−0.6
[−19.6; 0.1] |
8.4
[−1.6; 150.3] |
−2.1
[−25.9; −0.2] |
29.0
[3.5; 187.8] |
−0.6
[−7.0; −0.04] |
7.8
[1.0; 50.5] |
| PM 2.5 | ||||||||
| Rural areas | / | / | / | / | / | / | −0.3 [−0.6; 0.01] |
2.4 [−0.6; 5.3] |
| Sparsely populated urban areas | / | / | / | / | / | / | −0.3 [−0.6; 0.01] |
2.3 [−0.6; 4.5] |
| Populated urban areas | / | / | / | / | / | / | −0.3 [−0.6; 0.01] |
2.3 [−0.6; 4.4] |
| Highly populated urban areas | / | / | / | / | / | / | −0.3 [−0.9; 0.002] |
2.4 [−0.5; 8.9] |
| Metropolitan France | / | / | / | / | / | / |
−0.3
[−0.9; 0.01] |
2.4
[−0.6; 8.9] |
Daily mean differences [min; max] by period, pollutant and area in France from March 16 to June 22, 2020, and from July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020.
Absolute differences between the levels during lockdown and the reference (modeled concentrations without lockdown).
Percentage of change (taken as negative for a decrease) modeled in the absence of lockdown.
Rural areas: <2,000 inhabitants; Sparsely populated urban areas: areas belonging to urban units of 2,000–20,000 inhabitants; Populated urban areas: areas belonging to urban units of 20,000–100,000 inhabitants; Highly populated urban areas: areas belonging to urban units of more than 100,000 inhabitants.
Values not used for the QHIA are not shown in this table but are available.
The authors apologize for these errors and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
Publisher's Note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Summary
Keywords
health impact assessment, air pollution, mortality, lockdown, COVID-19, France
Citation
Adélaïde L, Medina S, Wagner V, de Crouy-Chanel P, Real E, Colette A, Couvidat F, Bessagnet B, Alter M, Durou A, Host S, Hulin M, Corso M and Pascal M (2022) Corrigendum: Covid-19 Lockdown in Spring 2020 in France Provided Unexpected Opportunity to Assess Health Impacts of Falls in Air Pollution. Front. Sustain. Cities 4:940436. doi: 10.3389/frsc.2022.940436
Received
10 May 2022
Accepted
11 May 2022
Published
13 June 2022
Approved by
Frontiers Editorial Office, Frontiers Media SA, Switzerland
Volume
4 - 2022
Updates
Copyright
© 2022 Adélaïde, Medina, Wagner, de Crouy-Chanel, Real, Colette, Couvidat, Bessagnet, Alter, Durou, Host, Hulin, Corso and Pascal.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Lucie Adélaïde lucie.adelaide@santepubliquefrance.fr
This article was submitted to Health and Cities, a section of the journal Frontiers in Sustainable Cities
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.