Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37252333›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental research, health : ERH2023

Wildfire smoke exposure and emergency department visits in Washington State.

Annie Doubleday, Lianne Sheppard, Elena Austin, Tania Busch Isaksen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental research, health : ERH, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Imperative for a health-centred focus on climate change in radiology.Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Wildfire and asthma - The prospective interventions.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Impact of the 2023 wildfire smoke episodes in Ontario, Canada, on asthma and other health outcomes: an interrupted time-series analysis.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
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

4 authors.

Annie DoubledayDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6600-8668
Lianne SheppardDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States of America.
Elena AustinDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States of America.
Tania Busch IsaksenDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8180-6054

Funding

XENOBIOTIC BIOTRANSFORMATION AND DISPOSITIONP30ES007033 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI ALI SHOJAIE · 1995 to 2026
$42.5M
Biostatistics, Epidemiologic & Bioinformatic Training in Environmental HealthT32ES015459 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI June T. Spector · 2009 to 2026
$10.6M
NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES007033NIEHS NIH HHS T32 ES015459
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wildfires are increasing in prevalence in western North America due to changing climate conditions. A growing number of studies examine the impact of wildfire smoke on morbidity; however, few evaluate these impacts using syndromic surveillance data that cover many emergency departments (EDs). We used syndromic surveillance data to explore the effect of wildfire smoke exposure on all-cause respiratory and cardiovascular ED visits in Washington state. Using a time-stratified case crossover design, we observed an increased odds of asthma visits immediately after and in all five days following initial exposure (lag 0 OR: 1.13; 95% CI: 1.10, 1.17; lag 1-5 ORs all 1.05 or greater with a lower CI of 1.02 or higher), and an increased odds of respiratory visits in all five days following initial exposure (lag 1 OR: 1.02; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.03; lag 2-5 ORs and lower CIs were all at least as large) comparing wildfire smoke to non-wildfire smoke days. We observed mixed results for cardiovascular visits, with evidence of increased odds emerging only several days following initial exposure. We also found increased odds across all visit categories for a 10

Indexed as

climate changerisk communicationsyndromic surveillancewildfire smoke

Identifiers

PMID37252333
PMCPMC10213826

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.