MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Air Pollution Intervention Changes the Gut Microbiome and Virome of Adult Women in Uganda

2025· article· en· W4410276155 on OpenAlexaff
C.-Y. Huang, Edwin Nuwagira, Michael J. Tisza, M. Kim, M. Tayebwa, Jacob Vieira, Nicholas L. Lam, Eli Wallach, Matthew O. Wiens, Alexander C. Tsai, Linda Valeri, Jose Vallarino, John G. Allen, Peggy S. Lai

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman viromeMedicineMicrobiomeEnvironmental healthGut microbiomeIntervention (counseling)ImmunologyIntensive care medicineMetagenomicsGut floraBioinformaticsBiologyGeneticsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract RATIONALE: Emerging observational studies suggest that air pollution can influence the gut microbiome however air pollution exposure is often highly confounded. Recent studies suggest that the gut virome affects respiratory health independently of the gut microbiome. We have demonstrated in a randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.govNCT03351504) that a clean lighting intervention reduced personal exposure to fine particulate matter and black carbon among adult women in rural Uganda. METHODS: Stool samples were collected from 80 adult women living in rural Uganda at baseline, 12- and 18-months post-randomization. Participants randomized to the intervention group received a solar lighting system at baseline, while those randomized to the control group received a solar lighting system at 12 months. Deep metagenomics sequencing was performed and profiled for non-viral and viral taxonomic composition. The most prevalent non-viral microbial constituents belonged to bacteria, archaea, and eukaryotic kingdoms, while the identified viral microbial constituents all belonged to the class Caudoviricetes, double-stranded DNA tailed phages whose hosts are bacteria and archaea. Post-intervention, non-viral and viral signatures of reduced air pollution exposure comparing pre- vs. post- intervention samples were identified. In exploratory analyses, mediation models were used to assess whether microbiome or virome signatures are mediators of the relationship between the solar lighting intervention and improved respiratory symptoms. RESULTS: Provision of solar lighting systems reduced personal exposureto PM2.5 from an average of 82.5 μg/m3 to 49.2 μg/m3 (p = 0.010) andreduced black carbon exposure from 11.5 μg/m3 to 6.3 μg/m3 (p = 0.013) with a reduction in reported respiratory symptoms from 57.1% to 36.1% (p = 0.002). The solar lighting intervention led to greater changes in viral compared to non-viral microbial community structure as well as differential abundance of bacteria, eukaryote, and viral members. Microbial (Figure 1B) and viral (Figure 1A) signatures of reduced air pollution exposure were identified. Bacteriome but not virome signatures mediated 21.3% of the protective effect of the clean lighting intervention on improved respiratory symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: A clean lighting intervention altered both non-viral and viral gut microbial community members, reduced air pollution exposure, and improved respiratory symptoms. One mechanism by which air pollution reduction interventions may improve respiratory symptoms is through changes in gut microbiota. Future large randomized controlled trials of air pollution interventions should investigate the potential of the gut microbiome as a target for interventions to reduce the harmful effects of household air pollution on lung health.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine→Same topicClimate Change and Health Impacts→French-language works237,207→