ArticleHeliyon2024
Exploring the association between ambient air pollution and COVID-19 risk: A comprehensive meta-analysis with meta-regression modelling.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. 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.
- Nasal Exposure to Environmental PM2.5 Drives Testicular Pyroptosis and Tissue Damage: Evidence from Inhibitor Intervention and Multi Source Data.Research square · 2026Article
- Article
- Substantially underestimated global health risks of current ozone pollution.Nature communications · 2025Article
- PM2.5 from automobile exhaust induces apoptosis in male rat germ cells via the ROS-UPRmt signaling pathway.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Air pollution is speculated to increase the risk of Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Nevertheless, the results remain inconsistent and inconclusive. This study aimed to explore the association between ambient air pollution (AAP) and COVID-19 risks using a meta-analysis with meta-regression modelling. Methods: The inclusion criteria were: original studies quantifying the association using effect sizes and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs); time-series, cohort, ecological or case-crossover peer-reviewed studies in English. Exclusion criteria encompassed non-original studies, animal studies, and data with common errors. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and Google Scholar electronic databases were systemically searched for eligible literature, up to 31, March 2023. The risk of bias (ROB) was assessed following the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality parameters. A random-effects model was used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and their 95 % CIs. Results: A total of 58 studies, between 2020 and 2023, met the inclusion criteria. The global representation was skewed, with major contributions from the USA (24.1 %) and China (22.4 %). The distribution included studies on short-term (43.1 %) and long-term (56.9 %) air pollution exposure. Ecological studies constituted 51.7 %, time-series-27.6 %, cohorts-17.2 %, and case crossover-3.4 %. ROB assessment showed low (86.2 %) and moderate (13.8 %) risk. The COVID-19 incidences increased with a 10 μg/m Conclusion: The study, while robust, lacks causality demonstration and focuses only on the USA and China, limiting its generalizability. Regardless, the study provides a strong evidence base for air pollution-COVID-19-risks associations, offering valuable insights for intervention measures for COVID-19.
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.