Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33921868›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Municipal Solid Waste Management and Adverse Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review.

Giovanni Vinti, Valerie Bauza, Thomas Clasen, Kate Medlicott, Terry Tudor, Christian Zurbrügg, Mentore Vaccari

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Lessons Learned from Air Quality Assessments in Communities Living near Municipal Solid Waste Landfills.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Environmental sustainability in gynecologic oncology.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2024
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

7 authors.

Giovanni VintiDepartment of Civil Environmental, Architectural Engineering and Mathematics, University of Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6029-2402
Valerie BauzaGangarosa Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1919-0767
Thomas ClasenGangarosa Department of Environmental Health, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4062-5788
Kate MedlicottDepartment of Public Health, Environment and Social Determinants of Health, World Health Organization, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland.
Terry TudorSusConnect Ltd. Weedon Bec, Northamptonshire NN7 4PS, UK.
Christian ZurbrüggDepartment of Sanitation, Water and Solid Waste for Development (Sandec), Eawag-Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Überlandstrasse 133, 8600 Dübendorf, Switzerland.
Mentore VaccariDepartment of Civil Environmental, Architectural Engineering and Mathematics, University of Brescia, 25123 Brescia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1611-6772

Funding

Graduate and Postdoctoral Training in ToxicologyT32ES012870 · NIEHS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Carmen Joseph Marsit · 2004 to 2026
$9.1M
NIEHS NIH HHS T32 ES012870World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Municipal solid waste (MSW) can pose a threat to public health if it is not safely managed. Despite prior research, uncertainties remain and refurbished evidence is needed along with new approaches. We conducted a systematic review of recently published literature to update and expand the epidemiological evidence on the association between MSW management practices and resident populations' health risks. Studies published from January 2005 to January 2020 were searched and reviewed following PRISMA guidelines. Eligible MSW treatment or disposal sites were defined as landfills, dumpsites, incinerators, waste open burning, transfer stations, recycling sites, composting plants, and anaerobic digesters. Occupational risks were not assessed. Health effects investigated included mortality, adverse birth and neonatal outcomes, cancer, respiratory conditions, gastroenteritis, vector-borne diseases, mental health conditions, and cardiovascular diseases. Studies reporting on human biomonitoring for exposure were eligible as well. Twenty-nine studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria of our protocol, assessing health effects only associated with proximity to landfills, incinerators, and dumpsites/open burning sites. There was some evidence of an increased risk of adverse birth and neonatal outcomes for residents near each type of MSW site. There was also some evidence of an increased risk of mortality, respiratory diseases, and negative mental health effects associated with residing near landfills. Additionally, there was some evidence of increased risk of mortality associated with residing near incinerators. However, in many cases, the evidence was inadequate to establish a strong relationship between a specific exposure and outcomes, and the studies rarely assessed new generation technologies. Evidence gaps remain, and recommendations for future research are discussed.

Indexed as

Refuse DisposalWaste ManagementHumansIncinerationInfant, NewbornRecyclingSolid WasteWaste Disposal FacilitiesSolid WasteepidemiologyMSWPRISMA guidelinespublic health

Identifiers

PMID33921868
PMCPMC8072713

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.