TY - JOUR
T1 - Two Decades of Air Pollution Health Risk Assessment
T2 - Insights From the Use of WHO's AirQ and AirQ+ Tools
AU - Amini, Heresh
AU - Yousefian, Fatemeh
AU - Faridi, Sasan
AU - Andersen, Zorana J
AU - Calas, Ellénore
AU - Castro, Alberto
AU - Cervantes-Martínez, Karla
AU - Cole-Hunter, Thomas
AU - Corso, Magali
AU - Dragic, Natasa
AU - Evangelopoulos, Dimitris
AU - Gapp, Christian
AU - Hassanvand, Mohammad Sadegh
AU - Kim, Ingu
AU - Le Tertre, Alain
AU - Medina, Sylvia
AU - Miller, Brian
AU - Montero, Stephanie
AU - Requia, Weeberb J
AU - Riojas-Rodriguez, Horacio
AU - Rojas-Rueda, David
AU - Samoli, Evangelia
AU - Texcalac-Sangrador, Jose Luis
AU - Yitshak-Sade, Maayan
AU - Schwartz, Joel
AU - Kuenzli, Nino
AU - Spadaro, Joseph V
AU - Krzyzanowski, Michal
AU - Mudu, Pierpaolo
N1 - Copyright © 2024 Amini, Yousefian, Faridi, Andersen, Calas, Castro, Cervantes-Martínez, Cole-Hunter, Corso, Dragic, Evangelopoulos, Gapp, Hassanvand, Kim, Le Tertre, Medina, Miller, Montero, Requia, Riojas-Rodriguez, Rojas-Rueda, Samoli, Texcalac-Sangrador, Yitshak-Sade, Schwartz, Kuenzli, Spadaro, Krzyzanowski and Mudu.
PY - 2024
Y1 - 2024
N2 - OBJECTIVES: We evaluated studies that used the World Health Organization's (WHO) AirQ and AirQ+ tools for air pollution (AP) health risk assessment (HRA) and provided best practice suggestions for future assessments.METHODS: We performed a comprehensive review of studies using WHO's AirQ and AirQ+ tools, searching several databases for relevant articles, reports, and theses from inception to Dec 31, 2022.RESULTS: We identified 286 studies that met our criteria. The studies were conducted in 69 countries, with most (57%) in Iran, followed by Italy and India (∼8% each). We found that many studies inadequately report air pollution exposure data, its quality, and validity. The decisions concerning the analysed population size, health outcomes of interest, baseline incidence, concentration-response functions, relative risk values, and counterfactual values are often not justified, sufficiently. Many studies lack an uncertainty assessment.CONCLUSION: Our review found a number of common shortcomings in the published assessments. We suggest better practices and urge future studies to focus on the quality of input data, its reporting, and associated uncertainties.
AB - OBJECTIVES: We evaluated studies that used the World Health Organization's (WHO) AirQ and AirQ+ tools for air pollution (AP) health risk assessment (HRA) and provided best practice suggestions for future assessments.METHODS: We performed a comprehensive review of studies using WHO's AirQ and AirQ+ tools, searching several databases for relevant articles, reports, and theses from inception to Dec 31, 2022.RESULTS: We identified 286 studies that met our criteria. The studies were conducted in 69 countries, with most (57%) in Iran, followed by Italy and India (∼8% each). We found that many studies inadequately report air pollution exposure data, its quality, and validity. The decisions concerning the analysed population size, health outcomes of interest, baseline incidence, concentration-response functions, relative risk values, and counterfactual values are often not justified, sufficiently. Many studies lack an uncertainty assessment.CONCLUSION: Our review found a number of common shortcomings in the published assessments. We suggest better practices and urge future studies to focus on the quality of input data, its reporting, and associated uncertainties.
U2 - 10.3389/phrs.2024.1606969
DO - 10.3389/phrs.2024.1606969
M3 - Review
C2 - 38957684
VL - 45
JO - Public Health Reviews (Print)
JF - Public Health Reviews (Print)
SN - 0301-0422
M1 - 1606969
ER -