ArticleFrontiers in public health2022
Risk of functional disability associated with solid fuel use and population impact of reducing indoor air pollution in China: A national cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Physical activity modifies the association between ambient air pollution and comorbid depression and disability in activities of daily living.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Association between solid cooking fuels and functional disability: evidence from a cross-sectional and longitudinal study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Association between with household solid fuel use and successful aging among older people in China: a cross-sectional and perspective study from CHARLS.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Prevalence and correlates of disability in older adults, Ghana: evidence from the Ghana 2021 Population and Housing Census.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In China, numerous people still rely on solid fuel for household use. To date, the association between household solid fuel use and functional disability, and what benefit reducing household solid fuel usage could bring at the population level to China remain unclear. Method: Data were from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study. Household fuel was classified as clean or solid for cooking or heating. Functional disability was defined as difficulties in any item of activities of daily living (ADL) or instrumental activities of daily living (IADL). The associations of household fuel use in 2011 and its transitions between 2011 and 2013 with subsequent ADL or IADL disability were assessed with Cox proportional-hazards models. The number of events prevented in a population (NEPP) was generated to estimate how many functionally disabled patients could be prevented by reducing solid fuel usage. Results: A total of 6,216 and 9,716 participants without prior ADL or IADL disability in 2011 were included. Solid (vs. clean) fuel users were more likely to develop ADL and IADL disability, with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of 1.37 (1.28~1.45) and 1.38 (1.31~1.46) for using both solid cooking and heating fuel. Furthermore, participants that switched heating fuel from solid to clean (vs. keep solid) were about 20% less likely to develop functional disability. Cooking fuel use switching from solid to clean (vs. keep solid) was also negatively associated with IADL disability (HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.74~0.96). Over the next 7 years, raising clean fuel usage to 80% could prevent about 4.9 million ADL disability and 2.6 million IADL disability among Chinese aged 45 and older. Conclusion: Household solid fuel use was a risk factor for functional disability. Reducing solid fuel usage could help reduce the burden of functional disability in the current aging society of China.
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.