MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367042639 · doi:10.1289/ehp11179

Household Air Pollution and Adult Lung Function Change, Respiratory Disease, and Mortality across Eleven Low- and Middle-Income Countries from the PURE Study

2023· article· en· W4367042639 on OpenAlexafffund
Ying Wang, MyLinh Duong, Michael Bräuer, Sumathy Rangarajan, Antonio Dans, Fernando Laņas, Patricio López‐Jaramillo, Thandi Puoane, Karen Yeates, Jephat Chifamba, Rita Yusuf, Zhiguang Liu, Yang Li, Lap Ah Tse, Rajeev Gupta, Sanjeev Nair, P. V. M. Lakshmi, Romaina Iqbal, Taniya Anto, Salim Yusuf, Perry Hystad

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Health Perspectives · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnergy and Environment Impacts
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesQueen's UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaPopulation Health Research InstituteMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthHeart and Stroke Foundation of CanadaServierSanofi
KeywordsLung functionEnvironmental healthAir pollutionLow and middle income countriesRespiratory systemRespiratory diseaseLung diseaseBurden of diseaseMedicineLungDeveloping countryBiologyInternal medicinePopulationEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Globally, household air pollution (HAP) is a major environmental hazard that affects respiratory health. However, few studies have examined associations between HAP and lung function decline and respiratory disease and mortality. Methods: We used data from the Prospective Urban and Rural Epidemiology study and examined adults residing in 240 rural communities in 11 low- and middle-income countries where HAP from cooking with solid fuels is common. Spirometry was conducted for 28,574 individuals at baseline and 12,489 individuals during follow-up (mean of 8 y between spirometry measures). In cross-sectional analyses, we compared lung function measurements [forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), and FEV1/FVC ratio] in those who used solid fuels for cooking in comparison with clean fuels. Using repeated measurements of lung function, we examined the percent change in lung function measures per year, comparing individuals by baseline fuel type and individuals who used solid fuels at baseline but switched to clean fuels during follow-up. We also examined associations with prospective health events (any respiratory diseases, respiratory disease hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality). Results: In adjusted cross-sectional models, use of solid fuel in comparison with clean fuels was associated with lower FEV1 of −17.5mL (95% CI: −32.7, −2.3) and FVC of −14.4mL (95% CI: −32.0, 3.2), but not FEV1/FVC. In longitudinal analyses, individuals who switched from solid fuels to clean cooking fuels during follow-up (n=3,901, 46% of those using solid fuel at baseline), showed no differences in the annual rate of change in FEV1 or FVC, but had small improvements in FEV1/FVC change (0.2% per year, 95% CI: 0.03, 0.3). Individuals who switched from solid to clean fuels had a decreased hazard ratio for respiratory events of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.57, 1.00) in comparison with persistent solid fuel users, which was not attenuated by lung function measures. Conclusion: We observed modest associations between HAP exposure and lung function, lung function change, and respiratory disease and mortality. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP11179

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.914

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Health PerspectivesSame topicEnergy and Environment ImpactsFrench-language works237,207