Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32902328›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental health perspectives2020

Methodological Considerations for Epidemiological Studies of Air Pollution and the SARS and COVID-19 Coronavirus Outbreaks.

Paul J Villeneuve, Mark S Goldberg

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental health perspectives, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 105 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
105citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
14.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

105 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 165 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Ambient Air Pollution and COVID-19 in California.Research report (Health Effects Institute) · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Paul J VilleneuveSchool of Mathematics and Statistics, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada.
Mark S GoldbergDepartment of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
McGill University · CAMcGill University Health Centre · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStudies have reported that ambient air pollution is associated with an increased risk of developing or dying from coronavirus-2 (COVID-19). Methodological approaches to investigate the health impacts of air pollution on epidemics should differ from those used for chronic diseases, but the methods used in these studies have not been appraised critically.

objectivesOur study aimed to identify and critique the methodological approaches of studies of air pollution on infections and mortality due to COVID-19 and to identify and critique the methodological approaches of similar studies concerning severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS).

methodsPublished and unpublished papers of associations between air pollution and developing or dying from COVID-19 or SARS that were reported as of 10 May 2020 were identified through electronic databases, internet searches, and other sources.

resultsAll six COVID-19 studies and two of three SARS studies reported positive associations. Two were time series studies that estimated associations between daily changes in air pollution, one was a cohort that assessed associations between air pollution and the secondary spread of SARS, and six were ecological studies that used area-wide exposures and outcomes. Common shortcomings included possible cross-level bias in ecological studies, underreporting of health outcomes, using grouped data, the lack of highly spatially resolved air pollution measures, inadequate control for confounding and evaluation of effect modification, not accounting for regional variations in the timing of outbreaks' temporal changes in at-risk populations, and not accounting for nonindependence of outcomes. DISCUSSION: Studies of air pollution and novel coronaviruses have relied mainly on ecological measures of exposures and outcomes and are susceptible to important sources of bias. Although longitudinal studies with individual-level data may be imperfect, they are needed to adequately address this topic. The complexities involved in these types of studies underscore the need for careful design and for peer review. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP7411.

Indexed as

Air PollutionBiasCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19Disease OutbreaksEpidemiologic StudiesHumansPandemicsPneumonia, ViralResearch DesignRisk FactorsSevere Acute Respiratory Syndrome

Identifiers

PMID32902328
PMCPMC7480171
OpenAlexW3084351653

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.