当前位置: X-MOL 学术Environ. Health Perspect. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Methodological Considerations for Epidemiological Studies of Air Pollution and the SARS and COVID-19 Coronavirus Outbreaks.
Environmental Health Perspectives ( IF 10.4 ) Pub Date : 2020-9-9 , DOI: 10.1289/ehp7411
Paul J Villeneuve 1, 2 , Mark S Goldberg 2, 3, 4, 5
Affiliation  

Abstract

Background:

Studies have reported that ambient air pollution is associated with an increased risk of developing or dying from coronavirus-2 (COVID-19). Methodological approaches to investigate the health impacts of air pollution on epidemics should differ from those used for chronic diseases, but the methods used in these studies have not been appraised critically.

Objectives:

Our study aimed to identify and critique the methodological approaches of studies of air pollution on infections and mortality due to COVID-19 and to identify and critique the methodological approaches of similar studies concerning severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS).

Methods:

Published and unpublished papers of associations between air pollution and developing or dying from COVID-19 or SARS that were reported as of 10 May 2020 were identified through electronic databases, internet searches, and other sources.

Results:

All six COVID-19 studies and two of three SARS studies reported positive associations. Two were time series studies that estimated associations between daily changes in air pollution, one was a cohort that assessed associations between air pollution and the secondary spread of SARS, and six were ecological studies that used area-wide exposures and outcomes. Common shortcomings included possible cross-level bias in ecological studies, underreporting of health outcomes, using grouped data, the lack of highly spatially resolved air pollution measures, inadequate control for confounding and evaluation of effect modification, not accounting for regional variations in the timing of outbreaks’ temporal changes in at-risk populations, and not accounting for nonindependence of outcomes.

Discussion:

Studies of air pollution and novel coronaviruses have relied mainly on ecological measures of exposures and outcomes and are susceptible to important sources of bias. Although longitudinal studies with individual-level data may be imperfect, they are needed to adequately address this topic. The complexities involved in these types of studies underscore the need for careful design and for peer review. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP7411



中文翻译:

空气污染和 SARS 和 COVID-19 冠状病毒爆发流行病学研究的方法学考虑。

摘要

背景:

研究报告称,环境空气污染与感染冠状病毒 2 (COVID-19) 或死亡的风险增加有关。调查空气污染对流行病的健康影响的方法应该不同于用于慢性疾病的方法,但这些研究中使用的方法尚未得到严格评价。

目标:

我们的研究旨在识别和批评空气污染对 COVID-19 感染和死亡率影响的研究方法,以及识别和批评有关严重急性呼吸系统综合症 (SARS) 的类似研究的方法。

方法:

截至 2020 年 5 月 10 日,通过电子数据库、互联网搜索和其他来源确定了已发表和未发表的关于空气污染与罹患或死于 COVID-19 或 SARS 之间关系的论文。

结果:

所有六项 COVID-19 研究和三项 SARS 研究中的两项都报告了积极的关联。其中两项是估计空气污染每日变化之间关联的时间序列研究,一项是评估空气污染与 SARS 二次传播之间关联的队列研究,还有六项是使用区域范围内的暴露和结果的生态研究。常见的缺点包括生态研究中可能存在的跨层次偏差、少报健康结果、使用分组数据、缺乏高度空间分辨率的空气污染措施、对混杂因素的控制和效果修正的评估不充分、没有考虑到时间上的区域差异。疫情在高危人群中的时间变化,并且没有考虑结果的非独立性。

讨论:

对空气污染和新型冠状病毒的研究主要依赖于暴露和结果的生态测量,并且容易受到重要偏差的影响。尽管个人数据的纵向研究可能不完善,但需要它们来充分解决这个主题。此类研究的复杂性强调了仔细设计和同行评审的必要性。https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP7411

更新日期:2020-09-10
down
wechat
bug