Two decades of air pollution health risk assessment: insights from the use of WHO's AirQ and AirQ+ tools
File(s)phrs-45-1606969.pdf (2.28 MB)
Published version
Author(s)
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
Objectives: We evaluated studies that used the World Health Organization’s (WHO) AirQ and AirQ+ tools for air pollution (AP) health risk assessment (HRA) and provided best practice suggestions for future assessments.
Methods: We performed a comprehensive review of studies using WHO’s AirQ and AirQ+ tools, searching several databases for relevant articles, reports, and theses from inception to Dec 31, 2022.
Results: We identified 286 studies that met our criteria. The studies were conducted in 69 countries, with most (57%) in Iran, followed by Italy and India (∼8% each). We found that many studies inadequately report air pollution exposure data, its quality, and validity. The decisions concerning the analysed population size, health outcomes of interest, baseline incidence, concentration-response functions, relative risk values, and counterfactual values are often not justified, sufficiently. Many studies lack an uncertainty assessment.
Conclusion: Our review found a number of common shortcomings in the published assessments. We suggest better practices and urge future studies to focus on the quality of input data, its reporting, and associated uncertainties.
Methods: We performed a comprehensive review of studies using WHO’s AirQ and AirQ+ tools, searching several databases for relevant articles, reports, and theses from inception to Dec 31, 2022.
Results: We identified 286 studies that met our criteria. The studies were conducted in 69 countries, with most (57%) in Iran, followed by Italy and India (∼8% each). We found that many studies inadequately report air pollution exposure data, its quality, and validity. The decisions concerning the analysed population size, health outcomes of interest, baseline incidence, concentration-response functions, relative risk values, and counterfactual values are often not justified, sufficiently. Many studies lack an uncertainty assessment.
Conclusion: Our review found a number of common shortcomings in the published assessments. We suggest better practices and urge future studies to focus on the quality of input data, its reporting, and associated uncertainties.
Date Issued
2024-06-18
Date Acceptance
2024-05-22
Citation
Public Health Reviews, 2024, 45
ISSN
0301-0422
Publisher
Frontiers Media S.A.
Journal / Book Title
Public Health Reviews
Volume
45
Copyright Statement
Copyright © 2024 Amini, Yousefian, Faridi, Andersen, Calas, Castro, Cervantes-Martínez, Cole-Hunter, Corso, Dragic, Evangelopoulos, Gapp, Hassanvand, Kim, Le Tertre, Medina, Miller, Montero, Requia, Riojas-Rodriguez, Rojas-Rueda, Samoli, Texcalac-Sangrador, Yitshak-Sade, Schwartz, Kuenzli, Spadaro, Krzyzanowski and Mudu. 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.
License URL
Identifier
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38957684
Subjects
air pollution
AirQ
burden of disease
health risk assessment
WHO
Publication Status
Published
Coverage Spatial
Switzerland
Article Number
1606969
Date Publish Online
2024-06-18