ArticleEnvironmental research2020
Adverse health impacts of cooking with kerosene: A multi-country analysis within the Prospective Urban and Rural Epidemiology Study.
Article in Environmental research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Climate, Air Quality and Their Contribution to Cardiovascular Disease Morbidity and Mortality in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Global heart · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of Household Air Pollution (HAP) on Cardiovascular Diseases in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- Incidence, viral etiology, and risk factors of wheezing in children under two years of age: findings from a low-income urban community in Dhaka, Bangladesh.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Article
- Global, regional, and national burden of household air pollution, 1990-2021: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021.Lancet (London, England) · 2025Article
- Predictors of pregnancy loss among urban and rural women aged 15 to 49 years in Pakistan.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Educational attainment and self-reported environmental exposures of pregnant women living in Nairobi, Kenya.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Associations between abnormal sleep behavior and indoor environmental risk factors among children with a chronic cough in Wuxi, China: a cross-sectional study.BMC pediatrics · 2024Article
- Impacts of solid fuel use versus smoking on life expectancy at age 30 years in the rural and urban Chinese population: a prospective cohort study.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2023Article
- cMIND Diet, Indoor Air Pollution, and Depression: A Cohort Study Based on the CLHLS from 2011 to 2018.Nutrients · 2023Article
- Kerosene Biodegradation by Highly Efficient Indigenous Bacteria Isolated From Hydrocarbon-Contaminated Sites.Microbiology insights · 2023Article
- The Choice of Healthy Source of Energy for Cooking Among Households in Ghana: Does Financial Inclusion Matter?Environmental health insights · 2023Article
- Mapping development and health effects of cooking with solid fuels in low-income and middle-income countries, 2000-18: a geospatial modelling study.The Lancet. Global health · 2022Article
- History Taking as a Diagnostic Tool in Children With Chronic Cough.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 13 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundKerosene, which was until recently considered a relatively clean household fuel, is still widely used in low- and middle-income countries for cooking and lighting. However, there is little data on its health effects. We examined cardiorespiratory effects and mortality in households using kerosene as their primary cooking fuel within the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study.
methodsWe analyzed baseline and follow-up data on 31,490 individuals from 154 communities in China, India, South Africa, and Tanzania where there was at least 10% kerosene use for cooking at baseline. Baseline comorbidities and health outcomes during follow-up (median 9.4 years) were compared between households with kerosene versus clean (gas or electricity) or solid fuel (biomass and coal) use for cooking. Multi-level marginal regression models adjusted for individual, household, and community level covariates.
resultsHigher rates of prevalent respiratory symptoms (e.g. 34% [95% CI:15-57%] more dyspnea with usual activity, 44% [95% CI: 21-72%] more chronic cough or sputum) and lower lung function (differences in FEV
conclusionsKerosene use for cooking was associated with higher rates of baseline respiratory morbidity and increased risk of mortality and cardiorespiratory outcomes during follow-up when compared to either clean or solid fuels. Replacing kerosene with cleaner-burning fuels for cooking is recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.