ArticleInternational journal of geriatric psychiatry2026
Household Energy Infrastructure, Cooking Fuel Use, and Mental Health Among Older Adults in Rural China.
Article in International journal of geriatric psychiatry, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the associations of household energy infrastructure and primary cooking fuel use with mental health among older adults in rural China.
methodsThis cross-sectional analysis included 4975 rural adults aged 60 years or older from 3291 households in the 2018 China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study. Mental health was operationalized as depressive symptoms measured using the 10-item Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CESD-10); the continuous score was primary and CESD-10 ≥ 10 secondary. Exposures were Coal gas/natural gas availability, heating availability, and primary cooking fuel (solid, gaseous, or electric). Separate adjusted linear and logistic regression models used household-clustered standard errors.
resultsNeither Coal gas/natural gas availability (b = -0.249, 95% CI -0.850 to 0.353; p = 0.418) nor heating availability (b = 0.104, 95% CI -0.811 to 1.018; p = 0.824) was clearly associated with CESD-10 scores. Compared with solid fuel, gaseous fuel (b = -1.422, 95% CI -1.889 to -0.956; p < 0.001; OR = 0.663, 95% CI 0.569-0.771) and electricity (b = -0.631, 95% CI -1.150 to -0.113; p = 0.017; OR = 0.851, 95% CI 0.727-0.996) were associated with lower scores and lower odds of probable depressive symptoms. Findings were consistent across sensitivity analyses.
conclusionsPrimary use of gaseous or electric cooking fuel was associated with better mental health, reflected in fewer depressive symptoms, whereas neither infrastructure indicator showed a clear association. Nominal availability and routine use should be measured separately. Longitudinal evidence is needed before causal conclusions can be drawn.
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.