ArticleBMC public health2026
Associations of long-term PM
Article in BMC public health, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPhysical activity (PA) is known to benefit sleep health, and the detrimental effects of PM2.5 on sleep are also recognized. However, whether taking PA with PM2.5 exposure is still beneficial to sleep is not well-understood.
methodsWe analyzed two UK Biobank cohorts. Both cohorts included PM2.5 exposure and sleep behavior data. The full cohort (n = 293,980) collected walking and moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) data via International Physical Activity Questionnaire from 2006 to 2010. The accelerometer-measured subsample (n = 63,474) provided light PA (LPA) and MVPA data from 2013 to 2015. Using linear regression and generalized additive models, we assessed independent associations and evaluated effect modification by PA on the PM2.5-sleep relationship using interaction terms. We further characterized nonlinear dose-response patterns to identify optimal PA levels.
resultsLong-term PM2.5 exposure was associated with reduced sleep quality and sleep duration. For every 10 MET-hours/week increase in MVPA, the negative association between PM2.5 and sleep quality was reduced by 0.0651 (0.0096, 0.1205), mitigating 24.7% of the detrimental effect of PM2.5 on sleep (derived from the ratio of the interaction coefficient to the main effect coefficient). Walking offset 19.6% of the negative impact. A threshold effect was observed in the dose-response relationship; optimal sleep improvements occurred at 37 MET-hours/week for walking (11.2 h/week) and 50 MET-hours/week for MVPA (8.33 h/week). Notably, these modifying effects were particularly robust in vulnerable populations, including individuals with obesity, males, and older adults.
conclusionsLong-term exposure to PM2.5 compromises sleep health, whereas PA can partially offset these adverse effects. This study identifies granular dose-response thresholds for Walking and MVPA, offering a quantitative target for intervention. PA serves as an economical strategy to preserve sleep health under PM2.5 exposure, with potential implications for tailoring exercise guidelines.
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.