abstract
- Analyte recovery is a critical quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) metric widely used to quantify bias when using sampling methods and measurement technologies. However, no study has systematically evaluated how well studies adhere to recommended recovery guidelines and reporting standards for measuring airborne semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs). This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated 87 studies deploying passive and active air samplers to measure SVOC concentrations in air. We compared recoveries in the assessed studies to the US EPA and European Union's recommended threshold of 70-120% mean recovery and ≤20% relative standard deviation (RSD). Overall, 39% of recoveries were outside either the recommendation for mean recovery or RSD regardless of compound class and sorbent type. This deviation may be reasonable for qualitative studies but is concerning for quantitative assessment of airborne SVOCs. In assessed calibration studies, differences in recovery between passive and active air samplers did not explain uptake rate variability. We also found wide variation in how recoveries are reported and treated in the literature. Our findings highlight that poor recoveries are prevalent in studies assessing airborne exposure to SVOCs. Reporting and treatment of recoveries is also inconsistent across studies. We recommend future studies to report individual compound recoveries, their treatment, and to recovery correct. We also recommend studies to investigate sample preparation methods to identify steps that are most critical to poor recoveries. Our findings and recommendations presented in this work will help improve quantitative assessment of airborne chemical exposures and standardize recovery reporting across labs.