ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2025
Adjustment Criteria for Air-Quality Standards by Altitude: A Scoping Review with Regulatory Overview.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Air-quality standards (AQS) are key regulatory tools to protect public health by setting pollutant thresholds. However, most are based on sea-level data. High-altitude (HA) environments differ in atmospheric conditions, influencing pollutant behavior and human vulnerability. These differences have prompted proposals for altitude-specific AQS adjustments. This systematic review identifies models and criteria supporting such adaptations and examines regulatory air-quality frameworks in countries with substantial populations living at very high altitudes (VHA). This review follows PRISMA-P guidelines, focusing on studies examining AQS adjustment approaches based on altitude. The Population/Concept/Context (PCC) framework was used to define search terms: population (AQS), concept (air pollutants), and context (altitude), with equivalents. The literature was retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Gale OneFile: Environmental Studies and Policy. A total of 2974 articles were identified, with 2093 remaining after duplicate removal. Following title and abstract screening, 2081 papers were excluded, leaving 12 for full-text evaluation. Ultimately, six studies met the eligibility criteria. Three studies focused on adjustment models based on atmospheric conditions, such as temperature and pressure changes, while the other three examined human physiological responses, particularly the increased inhaled air volume. China, Peru, and Bolivia have the largest populations living above 3500 m a.s.l., yet none of these countries have specific air-quality regulations tailored to HA conditions. The review underscores the necessity for tailored AQS in HA environments, highlighting specific criteria related to both atmospheric conditions and human physiological responses.
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.