{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017721518987341773, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002531645569620253, 'mean_word_length': 5.537190082644628, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Validation and subjective reports of exposure to traffic by traffic count, NO2 dispersion modeling and measuring NO2 emissions].

OBJECTIVES
The validity of self-reports of traffic density on street of residence in cities has not been evaluated extensively yet.


METHODS
This study compared traffic self-reports with exposure estimates based on traffic counts and emission measurements.


RESULTS
Self-reports correlated well with traffic count data but less well with data from measurements of background emission.


CONCLUSIONS
As traffic counts primarily represent direct exposure to road traffic and emission concentrations primarily represent city background exposure to traffic-related pollutants, self-reports reflect direct traffic exposure more strongly than background exposure.