ArticleScientific reports2022
Improving the design stage of air pollution studies based on wind patterns.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Shadows in the Air: Mental health vulnerabilities under PM10 and PM2.5, before and after COVID-19.SSM - population health · 2025Article
- Impacts of Vehicle Emission Regulations and Local Congestion Policies on Birth Outcomes Associated with Traffic Air Pollution.Research report (Health Effects Institute) · 2025Article
- High traffic roads and adverse birth outcomes: comparing births upwind and downwind of the same road.American journal of epidemiology · 2024Article
- Improving the design stage of air pollution studies based on wind patterns.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A growing literature in economics and epidemiology has exploited changes in wind patterns as a source of exogenous variation to better measure the acute health effects of air pollution. Since the distribution of wind components is not randomly distributed over time and related to other weather parameters, multivariate regression models are used to adjust for these confounding factors. However, this type of analysis relies on its ability to correctly adjust for all confounding factors and extrapolate to units without empirical counterfactuals. As an alternative to current practices and to gauge the extent of these issues, we propose to implement a causal inference pipeline to embed this type of observational study within an hypothetical randomized experiment. We illustrate this approach using daily data from Paris, France, over the 2008-2018 period. Using the Neyman-Rubin potential outcomes framework, we first define the treatment of interest as the effect of North-East winds on particulate matter concentrations compared to the effects of other wind directions. We then implement a matching algorithm to approximate a pairwise randomized experiment. It adjusts nonparametrically for observed confounders while avoiding model extrapolation by discarding treated days without similar control days. We find that the effective sample size for which treated and control units are comparable is surprisingly small. It is however reassuring that results on the matched sample are consistent with a standard regression analysis of the initial data. We finally carry out a quantitative bias analysis to check whether our results could be altered by an unmeasured confounder: estimated effects seem robust to a relatively large hidden bias. Our causal inference pipeline is a principled approach to improve the design of air pollution studies based on wind patterns.
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.