Table 1.

Summary of measurements included in prior randomized cookstove intervention studies

Name/Location of intervention study	Key publications	Intervention description	Types of Measurements Included
			Stove use/acceptability	Emissions	Personal exposure	Micro-environment	Health	Regional air quality
RESPIRE/CRECER Highland Guatemala	[24,37,40,57]	Collection of studies involved interventions with 500+ households using plancha improved stoves, gas stoves, and traditional (open fire) control groups	Quarterly stove use questionnaires; SUMs	Not measured in field	CO, PM2.5	CO, TSP, PM10, PM3.5, PM2.5	Blood pressure, acute illness (pneumonia), self-reported health symptoms	Not measured
Patsari/Michoacan, Mexico	[32,58-62]	Collection of studies involved interventions with 600 households using Pastari (ICS) and traditional (open fires) control group	Monthly visits reporting stove use	Field cooking tests (KPTs, WBTs and CCTs) and lab testing (WBT) in addition to GHG emissions measurements	CO, PM2.5	Kitchen/Indoor/Outdoor/Community Plaza for CO, PM2.5	Spirometry tests to measure lung function, blood samples, and self-reported health symptoms	PM2.5
Juntos and Barrick/ Peru	[44,63]	Two Intervention Programs; Juntos National (A), Barrick Gold Corp. (B) with 57+ households using improved custom brick stoves and traditional (open fire) group for baseline	Questionnaire & time use diaries at enrollment and 3 weeks after stove installation	Not measured	CO, PM2.5	Kitchen CO, PM2.5	Hydroxylate PAH biomarkers from urine samples	Not measured
DelAgua EcoZoom/Rwanda	[28,64]	566 households in three villages; EcoZoom Dura stove vs traditional. Intervention also included water filters	Surveys measuring acceptability and stove use conducted monthly for five months; SUMs on subset of stoves	No field measurements in Rwanda intervention study, but field-based emissions testing using same stove conducted in Uganda [34]	Not done in this study, but planned for follow-up	Kitchen PM2.5	Not done in this study, but planned for follow-up	Not measured
Surya/Indo-Gangetic Plains	[53,65-67]	Collection of studies involved interventions with 480+ households using a variety of improved biomass stoves, and traditional (mud/open fire) control groups	Surveys, Wireless Cookstove Sensing System (WiCS) (in development)	BC (Concentrations only)	Breathing zone BC	Kitchens/Outdoor BC and OC	Self-reported health symptoms	Regional BC and OC modeling
Ghana Sissala West	[38]	Intervention of 500+ households using constructed mud/brick stove and traditional (open fire) control groups	Surveyed participants on cooking activity and fuel wood gathering, SUMs	Not measured	CO	Not measured	Self-reported health symptoms	Not measured
India	[27]	Price experiment that tested 2 nontraditional cookstoves over 2,280 households.	Surveys used to access perceptions of stoves, health knowledge, socioeconomic status	Not Measured	Not Measured	Not Measured	Self-reported health symptoms	Not Measured
India	[13]	2,651 household intervention study subsidizing construction of inexpensive, locally-made mud stoves. Households responsible for providing mud, labor, and small payment for masonry and maintenance. Public lottery randomly assigned order of construction and distribution.	Three surveys in four years used to gauge stove usage, cooking activity, fuel expenditures, and perceptions about their efficacy	Not Measured	CO	Not Measured	Self-reported health symptoms, anthropometrics, spirometry tests to measure lung function	Not Measured
REACCTING, K-N District in Ghana	Work described here	200 household intervention study. Two types of biomass stoves introduced.	Surveys and SUMs	Controlled cooking tests in field	CO, PM2.5	CO and PM2.5 on a subset of homes	Biomarkers of inflammation from blood samples, anthropometrics, self-reported health questionnaires	Regional CO, NO, O3, and CO2 monitoring