Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26796890›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental health and toxicology2015

A meta-analysis of exposure to particulate matter and adverse birth outcomes.

Dirga Kumar Lamichhane, Jong-Han Leem, Ji-Young Lee, Hwan-Cheol Kim

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental health and toxicology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 101 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
101citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

101 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. What Is the Best Practice Method for Quantifying the Health and Economic Benefits of Active Transport?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Maternal fine particulate matter (PMEnvironmental science and pollution research international · 2019
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. PMAir quality, atmosphere, & health · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

41 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Dirga Kumar LamichhaneDepartment of Social and Preventive Medicine, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-9263-3707
Jong-Han LeemDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-3292-6492
Ji-Young LeeDepartment of Social and Preventive Medicine, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-0067-182X
Hwan-Cheol KimDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-3635-1297

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review to provide summarized evidence on the association between maternal exposure to particulate air pollution and birth weight (BW) and preterm birth (PTB) after taking into consideration the potential confounding effect of maternal smoking.

methodsWe systematically searched all published cohort and case-control studies examining BW and PTB association with particulate matter (PM, less than or equal to 2.5μm and 10.0 μm in diameter, PM2.5 and PM10, respectively) from PubMed and Web of Science, from January 1980 to April 2015. We extracted coefficients for continuous BW and odds ratio (OR) for PTB from each individual study, and meta-analysis was used to combine the coefficient and OR of individual studies. The methodological quality of individual study was assessed using a standard protocol proposed by Downs and Black. Forty-four studies met the inclusion criteria.

resultsIn random effects meta-analyses, BW as a continuous outcome was negativelyassociated with 10 μg/m(3) increase in PM10 (-10.31 g; 95% confidence interval [CI], -13.57 to -3.13 g; I-squared=0%, p=0.947) and PM2.5 (-22.17 g; 95% CI, -37.93 to -6.41 g; I-squared=92.3%, p <0.001) exposure during entire pregnancy, adjusted for maternal smoking. A significantly increased risk of PTB per 10 μg/m(3) increase in PM10 (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.41; I-squared=0%, p =0.977) and PM2.5 (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.22; I-squared=92.5%, p <0.001) exposure during entire pregnancy was observed. Effect size of change in BW per 10 μg/m(3) increase in PM tended to report stronger associations after adjustment for maternal smoking.

conclusionsWhile this systematic review supports an adverse impact of maternal exposure to particulate air pollution on birth outcomes, variation in effects by exposure period and sources of heterogeneity between studies should be further explored.

Indexed as

Birth weightHeterogeneityMaternal smokingMeta-analysisParticulate matterPreterm birth

Identifiers

PMID26796890
PMCPMC4722965

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.