Influence of light at night on allergic diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Allergic diseases impose a significant global disease burden, however, the influence of light at night exposure on these diseases in humans has not been comprehensively assessed. We aimed to summarize available evidence considering the association between light at night exposure and major allergic diseases through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We completed a search of six databases, two registries, and Google Scholar from inception until December 15, 2023, and included studies that investigated the influence of artificial light at night (ALAN, high vs. low exposure), chronotype (evening vs. morning chronotype), or shift work (night vs. day shift work) on allergic disease outcomes (asthma, allergic rhinitis, and skin allergies). We performed inverse-variance random-effects meta-analyses to examine the association between the exposures (ALAN exposure, chronotype, or shiftwork) and these allergic outcomes. Stratification analyses were conducted by exposure type, disease type, participant age, and geographical location along with sensitivity analyses to assess publication bias. RESULTS: We included 12 publications in our review. We found that exposure to light at night was associated with higher odds of allergic diseases, with the strongest association observed for ALAN exposure (OR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.04 to 3.39), followed by evening chronotype (OR: 1.35; 95% CI: 0.98 to 1.87) and exposure to night shift work (OR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.06 to 1.67). When analyses were stratified by disease types, light at night exposure was significantly associated with asthma (OR: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.19 to 2.20), allergic rhinitis (OR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.60 to 2.24), and skin allergies (OR: 1.11; 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.91). We also found that the association between light at night exposure and allergic diseases was more profound in youth (OR: 1.63; 95% CI: 1.07 to 2.48) than adults (OR: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.63). Additionally, we observed significant geographical variations in the association between light at night exposure and allergic diseases. CONCLUSIONS: Light at night exposure was associated with a higher prevalence of allergic diseases, both in youth and adults. More long-term epidemiological and mechanistic research is required to understand the possible interactions between light at night and allergic diseases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".