ArticlePLOS global public health2025
Respiratory symptoms after coalmine fire and pandemic: A longitudinal analysis of the Hazelwood Health Study adult cohort.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Agreement Between Self-Reported COVID-19 and Dried Blood Spot Serology: A Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Most respiratory symptoms have resolved 9 years after PMEnvironmental epidemiology (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2026Article
- Association between PMBMC pulmonary medicine · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine whether the effects of extreme but discrete PM2.5 exposure from a coal mine fire on respiratory symptoms abated, persisted, or worsened over time, and whether they were exacerbated by COVID-19. We analysed longitudinal survey data from a cohort residing near a 2014 coalmine fire in regional Australia. A 2016/2017 survey included 4,056 participants, of whom 612 were followed-up in 2022. Items included respiratory symptoms, history of COVID-19, and time-location diaries from the mine fire period, which were combined with geospatial and temporal models of fire-related PM2.5. Longitudinal effects of fire-related PM2.5 were examined using a mixed-effects logistic regression model. Exacerbation due to COVID-19 was examined using a logistic regression model. PM2.5 exposure was associated with chronic cough and possibly current wheeze, chest tightness, and current nasal symptoms 2-3 years post-fire, and chronic cough and current wheeze 8.5-9 years post-fire. Further, the association between PM2.5 and chronic cough and possibly current wheeze appeared to increase between the survey periods. While there were no detectable interactions between PM2.5 and COVID-19, PM2.5 exposure was associated with additional respiratory symptoms among participants who reported a history of COVID-19. In summary, medium-duration exposure to extreme levels of fire-related PM2.5 may have increased the long-term risk of chronic cough and current wheeze. While the COVID-19 pandemic started several years after the mine fire, contracting this illness may have exacerbated the effect of fire-related PM2.5 through development of additional respiratory symptoms.
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.