Systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies of long term outdoor nitrogen dioxide exposure and mortality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether long term exposure to outdoor nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is associated with all-cause or cause-specific mortality. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Global Health and Toxline databases were searched using terms developed by a librarian. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were completed independently by two reviewers. Conflicts were resolved through consensus and/or involvement of a third reviewer. Pooling of results across studies was conducted using random effects models, heterogeneity among included studies was assessed using Cochran's Q and I2 measures, and sources of heterogeneity were evaluated using meta-regression. Sensitivity of pooled estimates to individual studies was examined and publication bias was evaluated using Funnel plots, Begg's and Egger's tests, and trim and fill. RESULTS: Seventy-nine studies based on 47 cohorts, plus one set of pooled analyses of multiple European cohorts, met inclusion criteria. There was a consistently high degree of heterogeneity. After excluding studies with probably high or high risk of bias in the confounding domain (n = 12), pooled hazard ratios (HR) indicated that long term exposure to NO2 was significantly associated with mortality from all/ natural causes (pooled HR 1.047, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.023-1.072 per 10 ppb), cardiovascular disease (pooled HR 1.058, 95%CI 1.026-1.091), lung cancer (pooled HR 1.083, 95%CI 1.041-1.126), respiratory disease (pooled HR 1.062, 95%CI1.035-1.089), and ischemic heart disease (pooled HR 1.111, 95%CI 1.079-1.144). Pooled estimates based on multi-pollutant models were consistently smaller than those from single pollutant models and mostly non-significant. CONCLUSIONS: For all causes of death other than cerebrovascular disease, the overall quality of the evidence is moderate, and the strength of evidence is limited, while for cerebrovascular disease, overall quality is low and strength of evidence is inadequate. Important uncertainties remain, including potential confounding by co-pollutants or other concomitant exposures, and limited supporting mechanistic evidence. (PROSPERO registration number CRD42018084497).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.036 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".