ArticleThe Lancet. Planetary health2025
The differential effect of ambient temperature on age-specific and sex-specific mortality in the 300 largest cities of Russia, 2000-19: a first national time-series study.
Article in The Lancet. Planetary 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.
- Mapping the Burden of Ischemic Stroke Attributable to Temperature Variation under Climate Change Scenarios Accounting for Long-Term Adaptation.Environmental health perspectives · 2026Article
- Contemporary disasters may not kill more women than men: an empirical inquiry into sex-differentiated fatalities in the twenty-first century.Disasters · 2026Article
- The global, regional, and national burden of disease attributable to non-optimal temperatures in children.Translational pediatrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite a substantial body of evidence on the association between ambient temperature and mortality worldwide, there has not yet been a comprehensive country-wide assessment of the health effects of temperature in Russia. Moreover, there is no consensus on the effect of non-optimal temperatures on age-specific and sex-specific mortality. Our study aimed to provide the first analysis of temperature-related mortality in a large assembly of cities located in different geographical and socioeconomic zones of Russia.
methodsWe analysed 19 044 538 non-accidental deaths in the 300 most populated cities in Russia between 2000 and 2019. A two-stage analysis strategy was used. First, a quasi-Poisson time-series model with distributed lag non-linear model was fitted to estimate city-specific associations. Second, these associations were pooled with multivariate multilevel meta-regression, from which we also calculated temperature-attributable mortality.
findingsRelative risks were generally higher for cold than for heat, except for cities in southern European Russia. Cold had a similar effect in both sexes, with a varying age gradient across cities. Although the effect of heat was generally stronger in women than in men, with the relative risk increasing steadily with age in both sexes, men younger than 60 years had a significantly higher risk of dying from heat than women of the same age. With a total of 106 007 (95% empirical CI [eCI]: 88 942-121 318) temperature-attributable deaths, there was a higher mortality attributable fraction for cold (10·74%, 95% eCI 8·80-11·99) than for heat (0·67%, 0·42-0·88).
interpretationRussia has a high temperature-related mortality burden, with large differences in risk between cities and subpopulations. This information should be taken into account when planning public health interventions.
fundingEuropean Research Council, National Health and Medical Research Council, and Australian Research Council.
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.