17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      WHO Air Quality Guidelines 2021–Aiming for Healthier Air for all: A Joint Statement by Medical, Public Health, Scientific Societies and Patient Representative Organisations

      editorial

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

          Summary Background Rigorous analysis of levels and trends in exposure to leading risk factors and quantification of their effect on human health are important to identify where public health is making progress and in which cases current efforts are inadequate. The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019 provides a standardised and comprehensive assessment of the magnitude of risk factor exposure, relative risk, and attributable burden of disease. Methods GBD 2019 estimated attributable mortality, years of life lost (YLLs), years of life lived with disability (YLDs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 87 risk factors and combinations of risk factors, at the global level, regionally, and for 204 countries and territories. GBD uses a hierarchical list of risk factors so that specific risk factors (eg, sodium intake), and related aggregates (eg, diet quality), are both evaluated. This method has six analytical steps. (1) We included 560 risk–outcome pairs that met criteria for convincing or probable evidence on the basis of research studies. 12 risk–outcome pairs included in GBD 2017 no longer met inclusion criteria and 47 risk–outcome pairs for risks already included in GBD 2017 were added based on new evidence. (2) Relative risks were estimated as a function of exposure based on published systematic reviews, 81 systematic reviews done for GBD 2019, and meta-regression. (3) Levels of exposure in each age-sex-location-year included in the study were estimated based on all available data sources using spatiotemporal Gaussian process regression, DisMod-MR 2.1, a Bayesian meta-regression method, or alternative methods. (4) We determined, from published trials or cohort studies, the level of exposure associated with minimum risk, called the theoretical minimum risk exposure level. (5) Attributable deaths, YLLs, YLDs, and DALYs were computed by multiplying population attributable fractions (PAFs) by the relevant outcome quantity for each age-sex-location-year. (6) PAFs and attributable burden for combinations of risk factors were estimated taking into account mediation of different risk factors through other risk factors. Across all six analytical steps, 30 652 distinct data sources were used in the analysis. Uncertainty in each step of the analysis was propagated into the final estimates of attributable burden. Exposure levels for dichotomous, polytomous, and continuous risk factors were summarised with use of the summary exposure value to facilitate comparisons over time, across location, and across risks. Because the entire time series from 1990 to 2019 has been re-estimated with use of consistent data and methods, these results supersede previously published GBD estimates of attributable burden. Findings The largest declines in risk exposure from 2010 to 2019 were among a set of risks that are strongly linked to social and economic development, including household air pollution; unsafe water, sanitation, and handwashing; and child growth failure. Global declines also occurred for tobacco smoking and lead exposure. The largest increases in risk exposure were for ambient particulate matter pollution, drug use, high fasting plasma glucose, and high body-mass index. In 2019, the leading Level 2 risk factor globally for attributable deaths was high systolic blood pressure, which accounted for 10·8 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 9·51–12·1) deaths (19·2% [16·9–21·3] of all deaths in 2019), followed by tobacco (smoked, second-hand, and chewing), which accounted for 8·71 million (8·12–9·31) deaths (15·4% [14·6–16·2] of all deaths in 2019). The leading Level 2 risk factor for attributable DALYs globally in 2019 was child and maternal malnutrition, which largely affects health in the youngest age groups and accounted for 295 million (253–350) DALYs (11·6% [10·3–13·1] of all global DALYs that year). The risk factor burden varied considerably in 2019 between age groups and locations. Among children aged 0–9 years, the three leading detailed risk factors for attributable DALYs were all related to malnutrition. Iron deficiency was the leading risk factor for those aged 10–24 years, alcohol use for those aged 25–49 years, and high systolic blood pressure for those aged 50–74 years and 75 years and older. Interpretation Overall, the record for reducing exposure to harmful risks over the past three decades is poor. Success with reducing smoking and lead exposure through regulatory policy might point the way for a stronger role for public policy on other risks in addition to continued efforts to provide information on risk factor harm to the general public. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found
            Is Open Access

            Long-term exposure to PM and all-cause and cause-specific mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis

            As new scientific evidence on health effects of air pollution is generated, air quality guidelines need to be periodically updated. The objective of this review is to support the derivation of updated guidelines by the World Health Organization (WHO) by performing a systematic review of evidence of associations between long-term exposure to particulate matter with diameter under 2.5 µm (PM2.5) and particulate matter with diameter under 10 µm (PM10), in relation to all-cause and cause-specific mortality. As there is especially uncertainty about the relationship at the low and high end of the exposure range, the review needed to provide an indication of the shape of the concentration-response function (CRF). We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from database inception to 9 October 2018. Articles were checked for eligibility by two reviewers. We included cohort and case-control studies on outdoor air pollution in human populations using individual level data. In addition to natural-cause mortality, we evaluated mortality from circulatory diseases (ischemic heart disease (IHD) and cerebrovascular disease (stroke) also specifically), respiratory diseases (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and acute lower respiratory infection (ALRI) also specifically) and lung cancer. A random-effect meta-analysis was performed when at least three studies were available for a specific exposure-outcome pair. Risk of bias was assessed for all included articles using a specifically developed tool coordinated by WHO. Additional analyses were performed to assess consistency across geographic region, explain heterogeneity and explore the shape of the CRF. An adapted GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) assessment of the body of evidence was made using a specifically developed tool coordinated by WHO. A large number (N = 107) of predominantly cohort studies (N = 104) were included after screening more than 3000 abstracts. Studies were conducted globally with the majority of studies from North America (N = 62) and Europe (N = 25). More studies used PM2.5 (N = 71) as the exposure metric than PM10 (N = 42). PM2.5 was significantly associated with all causes of death evaluated. The combined Risk Ratio (RR) for PM2.5 and natural-cause mortality was 1.08 (95%CI 1.06, 1.09) per 10 µg/m3. Meta analyses of studies conducted at the low mean PM2.5 levels (<25, 20, 15, 12, 10 µg/m3) yielded RRs that were similar or higher compared to the overall RR, consistent with the finding of generally linear or supra-linear CRFs in individual studies. Pooled RRs were almost identical for studies conducted in North America, Europe and Western Pacific region. PM10 was significantly associated with natural-cause and most but not all causes of death. Application of the risk of bias tool showed that few studies were at a high risk of bias in any domain. Application of the adapted GRADE tool resulted in an assessment of "high certainty of evidence" for PM2.5 with all assessed endpoints except for respiratory mortality (moderate). The evidence was rated as less certain for PM10 and cause-specific mortality ("moderate" for circulatory, IHD, COPD and "low" for stroke mortality. Compared to the previous global WHO evaluation, the evidence base has increased substantially. However, studies conducted in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs) are still limited. There is clear evidence that both PM2.5 and PM10 were associated with increased mortality from all causes, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease and lung cancer. Associations remained below the current WHO guideline exposure level of 10 µg/m3 for PM2.5. Systematic review registration number (PROSPERO ID): CRD42018082577.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found
              Is Open Access

              Short-term exposure to particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and ozone (O3) and all-cause and cause-specific mortality: Systematic review and meta-analysis

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Int J Public Health
                Int J Public Health
                Int J Public Health
                International Journal of Public Health
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1661-8556
                1661-8564
                23 September 2021
                2021
                : 66
                : 1604465
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ]Institute for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Medical School, Heinrich-Heine-University of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
                [ 2 ]Health Effects Institute, Boston, MA, United States
                [ 3 ]Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
                [ 4 ]Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [ 5 ]School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
                [ 6 ]School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
                [ 7 ]Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
                [ 8 ]Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, Peking University, Beijing, China
                [ 9 ]School of Public Health, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
                [ 10 ]Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States
                [ 11 ]Department of Hygiene, Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
                [ 12 ]Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute (Swiss TPH), Basel, Switzerland
                [ 13 ]Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States
                [ 14 ]Instituto Salud Global Barcelona (ISGlobal), Barcelona, Spain
                [ 15 ]Nigerian Institute of Medical Research, Yaba, Lagos, Nigeria
                [ 16 ]European Lung Foundation, Sheffield, United Kingdom
                [ 17 ]Pan American Health Organization, Washington D.C., DC, United States
                [ 18 ]Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, United States
                [ 19 ]Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York City, NY, United States
                Author notes

                Edited and reviewed by: Olaf von dem Knesebeck, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany

                *Correspondence: Barbara Hoffmann, b.hoffmann@ 123456uni-duesseldorf.de
                Article
                1604465
                10.3389/ijph.2021.1604465
                8494774
                34630006
                9384448e-42f5-4643-9df7-ad6e66661ec0
                Copyright © 2021 Hoffmann, Boogaard, de Nazelle, Andersen, Abramson, Brauer, Brunekreef, Forastiere, Huang, Kan, Kaufman, Katsouyanni, Krzyzanowski, Kuenzli, Laden, Nieuwenhuijsen, Mustapha, Powell, Rice, Roca-Barceló, Roscoe, Soares, Straif and Thurston.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 13 September 2021
                : 13 September 2021
                Categories
                Public Health Archive
                Commentary

                Public health
                air pollution,who air quality guidelines,health effects,policy implications,average population exposure

                Comments

                Comment on this article