The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 5 of the 26 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch
Open accessAbstract
Air pollution resulting from wildfire smoke was associated with increased clinic visits for atopic dermatitis and itch and increased systemic medication prescriptions during the California Camp Fire period.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
17 Own result · 11 Own method · 10 Own interpretation · 7 Sources not found · 5 No full text of the sources · 3 Partly supported · 3 No basis given · 1 Not checked yet · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“An increase in the frequency and severity of wildfires is contributing to a recent increase in PM 2.5 concentrations in the western US after a decades-long reduction in air pollution.4,[31][32][33][34]”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [4] 4. Clay K, Muller NZ. Recent Increases in Air Pollution: Evidence and Implications for Mortality. National Bureau of Economic Research; 2019. doi:10.3386/w26381 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 4.2 (Wildfires; page unavailable) says wildfires may account for some of the 2016–2018 PM2.5 increase in the West, but not the overall decline-and-reversal pattern. The Introduction describes the preceding decline as roughly a decade, not decades, and the paper does not establish that wildfires increased in both frequency and severity. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not matchedcites [31][32][33][34]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Due to prevailing wind patterns, the burning caused a 9-fold increase in average weekly PM 2.5 concentration in San Francisco during a 2-week period (November 8-21, 2018), compared with baseline before and after; it peaked during the second week of the fire (Figure 1).”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Environmental Conditions
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The adjusted rate ratios for weekly pediatric itch visits were 1.82 (95% CI, 1.20-2.77)for fire status”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Air Pollution and Visits for Itch
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Camp Fire was the primary source of the air pollution spike in San Francisco during the study period, and the comparison periods had no large wildfires near San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: Patients residing in San Francisco were exposed to the air pollution measured in San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: The total number of dermatology clinic visits for any skin health-related concern is a valid offset for changes in patient volume and dermatologist numbers.
- Rests on an assumption: The 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 periods are valid controls for the 2018-2019 period.
- Rests on an assumption: There is no unmeasured confounding of the association between wildfire-associated air pollution and health care use for AD or itch.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and 1.55 (95% CI, 1.15-2.09)for average weekly smoke plume density score.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Air Pollution and Visits for Itch
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Camp Fire was the primary source of the air pollution spike in San Francisco during the study period, and the comparison periods had no large wildfires near San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: Patients residing in San Francisco were exposed to the air pollution measured in San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: The total number of dermatology clinic visits for any skin health-related concern is a valid offset for changes in patient volume and dermatologist numbers.
- Rests on an assumption: The 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 periods are valid controls for the 2018-2019 period.
- Rests on an assumption: There is no unmeasured confounding of the association between wildfire-associated air pollution and health care use for AD or itch.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Compared with the preceding weeks, the total number of clinic appointments for AD or itch increased during the second week of the Camp Fire and the following 4 weeks, with the exception of the national Thanksgiving holiday week.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Environmental Conditions
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We found insignificant spatial variation in daily smoke plume scores across zip codes in San Francisco.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Exposure Assessment
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“most of the adult patients seen for itch during the Camp Fire were not previously diagnosed with AD.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A 1-U increase in the average weekly National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration score was associated with 1.12 (95% CI, 1.04-1.22)times more average weekly adult AD clinic visits.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Air Pollution and AD Visits
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Camp Fire was the primary source of the air pollution spike in San Francisco during the study period, and the comparison periods had no large wildfires near San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: Patients residing in San Francisco were exposed to the air pollution measured in San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: The total number of dermatology clinic visits for any skin health-related concern is a valid offset for changes in patient volume and dermatologist numbers.
- Rests on an assumption: The 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 periods are valid controls for the 2018-2019 period.
- Rests on an assumption: There is no unmeasured confounding of the association between wildfire-associated air pollution and health care use for AD or itch.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The rate ratios generally decreased from lag 0 to lag 4 for all 3 exposure metrics.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Air Pollution and AD Visits
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The adjusted rate ratio for prescribed systemic medications during the Camp Fire at lag 0 was 1.45 (95% CI, 1.03-2.05).”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Air Pollution and AD Medications for Adults
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Camp Fire was the primary source of the air pollution spike in San Francisco during the study period, and the comparison periods had no large wildfires near San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: Patients residing in San Francisco were exposed to the air pollution measured in San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: The total number of dermatology clinic visits for any skin health-related concern is a valid offset for changes in patient volume and dermatologist numbers.
- Rests on an assumption: The 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 periods are valid controls for the 2018-2019 period.
- Rests on an assumption: There is no unmeasured confounding of the association between wildfire-associated air pollution and health care use for AD or itch.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 19
- It may state two separate claims as one. 17
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Tapinarof, a new topical aryl hydrocarbon receptor modulating agent, has shown promise for treatment of patients with AD 54,55”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Discussion
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [54] 54. Smith SH, Jayawickreme C, Rickard DJ, et al. Tapinarof is a natural AhR agonist that resolves skin inflammation in mice and humans. J Invest Dermatol. 2017;137(10):2110-2119. doi:10.1016/j.jid.2017.05.004 source
The Introduction (p. 1) says tapinarof cream displayed significant efficacy in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD). The Discussion (p. 7) also describes demonstrated clinical efficacy in patients with AD and identifies tapinarof as an AhR agonist. (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Could not verifycites [55] 55. Cianconi P, Betrò S, Janiri L. The impact of climate change on mental health: a systematic descriptive review. Front Psychiatry. 2020;11: 74. doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00074 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Materials and Methods section describes a review of climate change and mental health, not treatments for atopic dermatitis. Searches of our full-text copy for tapinarof, aryl hydrocarbon receptor, and atopic dermatitis found no passage addressing the treatment claim. (LLM, conf=0.78)
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The current increased risk for wildfires in California and other areas around the world is anticipated to result in exposures to high concentrations of air pollution, even in regions where background levels are usually low.63,64”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 08/02/2023
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [63] 63. Cushing L, Morello-Frosch R, Wander M, Pastor M. The haves, the have-nots, and the health of everyone: the relationship between social inequality and environmental quality. Annu Rev Public Health. 2015;36(1):193-209. doi:10.1146/ annurev-publhealth-031914-122646 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Within-Country Comparisons section discusses heat-risk neighborhoods and modeled air pollution, but not wildfire smoke. Searches for wildfire risk in California, high pollution exposures, and usually low background levels found no passage addressing the claim. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Partly supportedcites [64] 64. Mikati I, Benson AF, Luben TJ, Sacks JD, Richmond-Bryant J. Disparities in distribution of particulate matter emission sources by race and poverty status. Am J Public Health. 2018;108(4): 480-485. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2017.304297 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract (page unavailable) identifies wildfires as natural events that contribute to ambient particulate matter. It does not address increasing wildfire risk in California or elsewhere, predict high pollution concentrations, or discuss regions with usually low background levels. (LLM, conf=0.83)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Could not verify
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The associations were larger for the pediatric population compared with the adult population and largest at lag 0 for all 3 exposure metrics.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Air Pollution and AD Visits
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The rates of weekly AD clinic visits during the Camp Fire were 1.49 (95% CI, 1.07-2.07)times the rate for nonwildfire weeks at lag 0 for pediatric patients”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Air Pollution and AD Visits
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Rests on an assumption: The Camp Fire was the primary source of the air pollution spike in San Francisco during the study period, and the comparison periods had no large wildfires near San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: Patients residing in San Francisco were exposed to the air pollution measured in San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: The total number of dermatology clinic visits for any skin health-related concern is a valid offset for changes in patient volume and dermatologist numbers.
- Rests on an assumption: The 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 periods are valid controls for the 2018-2019 period.
- Rests on an assumption: There is no unmeasured confounding of the association between wildfire-associated air pollution and health care use for AD or itch.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During the Camp Fire, 89% of the adults who presented with itch were not previously diagnosed with AD, compared with patients with itch during the same 2 weeks in 2015 (59%) and 2016 (51%).”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Study Population
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For the topical medication outcome, the adjusted rate ratios were greater than 1 but did not reach statistical significance, except for lag 0 for the smoke plume density metric: 1.14 (95% CI, 1.01-1.28).”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Air Pollution and AD Medications for Adults
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The Camp Fire was the primary source of the air pollution spike in San Francisco during the study period, and the comparison periods had no large wildfires near San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: Patients residing in San Francisco were exposed to the air pollution measured in San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: The total number of dermatology clinic visits for any skin health-related concern is a valid offset for changes in patient volume and dermatologist numbers.
- Rests on an assumption: The 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 periods are valid controls for the 2018-2019 period.
- Rests on an assumption: There is no unmeasured confounding of the association between wildfire-associated air pollution and health care use for AD or itch.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and 1.15 (95% CI, 1.02-1.30)times the rate for nonwildfire weeks at lag 0 for adults.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Air Pollution and AD Visits
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Rests on an assumption: The Camp Fire was the primary source of the air pollution spike in San Francisco during the study period, and the comparison periods had no large wildfires near San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: Patients residing in San Francisco were exposed to the air pollution measured in San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: The total number of dermatology clinic visits for any skin health-related concern is a valid offset for changes in patient volume and dermatologist numbers.
- Rests on an assumption: The 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 periods are valid controls for the 2018-2019 period.
- Rests on an assumption: There is no unmeasured confounding of the association between wildfire-associated air pollution and health care use for AD or itch.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At lag 0, the rate ratio for the fire status exposure was 1.29 (95% CI, 0.96-1.75),for the smoke plume density exposure was 1.16 (95% CI, 0.94-1.43),and for the PM 2.5 exposure was 1.03 (95% CI, 0.99-1.07).However, unlike the results for pediatric itch visits, these results did not achieve statistical significance (Figure 3B).”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Air Pollution and Visits for Itch
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The Camp Fire was the primary source of the air pollution spike in San Francisco during the study period, and the comparison periods had no large wildfires near San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: Patients residing in San Francisco were exposed to the air pollution measured in San Francisco.
- Rests on an assumption: The total number of dermatology clinic visits for any skin health-related concern is a valid offset for changes in patient volume and dermatologist numbers.
- Rests on an assumption: The 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 periods are valid controls for the 2018-2019 period.
- Rests on an assumption: There is no unmeasured confounding of the association between wildfire-associated air pollution and health care use for AD or itch.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Epidemiologic studies on skin diseases have primarily focused on chronic exposure to air pollution, but the association between acute exposure and common cutaneous diseases, such as AD, is becoming increasingly important to assess as environmental conditions change.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the latter of which is considered more harmful, 58”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [58] 58. Tang K-T, Ku K-C, Chen D-Y, Lin C-H, Tsuang B-J, Chen Y-H. Adult atopic dermatitis and exposure to air pollutants-a nationwide population-based study. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2017;118(3):351-355. doi:10.1016/j.anai.2016.12.005 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The models also included a holiday week indicator variable that accounted for weeks that had US national holidays, such as Thanksgiving.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Statistical Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Covariates in the models included average temperature, relative humidity, patient age, and period (2015-2016, 2016-2017, or 2018-2019).”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Statistical Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Small longitudinal studies of schoolchildren in Korea similarly found increased patient-reported AD symptom severity in association with exposure to particulate matter.27,28”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [27] 27. Kim J, Kim E-H, Oh I, et al. Symptoms of atopic dermatitis are influenced by outdoor air pollution. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2013;132(2):495-8.e1. doi:10. 1016/j.jaci.2013.04.019
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [28] 28. Schnass W, Hüls A, Vierkötter A, Krämer U, Krutmann J, Schikowski T. Traffic-related air pollution and eczema in the elderly: findings from the SALIA cohort. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2018; 221(6):861-867. doi:10.1016/j.ijheh.2018.06.002 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The epidemiologic evidence for an association between air pollution and AD is mixed; some studies report null findings, [17][18][19][20][21] but many others report a positive association.[22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [17][18][19][20][21]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Alternatively, these patients may have subclinical AD not previously diagnosed.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Discussion
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“On a molecular level, air pollution contributes to AD pathogenesis through several mechanisms, including the aryl hydrocarbon receptor pathway, oxidative stress, and inflammation.[51][52][53]”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [51][52][53]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“environmental disasters cause psychosocial stress, 56”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [56] 56. Mochizuki H, Lavery MJ, Nattkemper LA, et al. Impact of acute stress on itch sensation and scratching behaviour in patients with atopic dermatitis and healthy controls. Br J Dermatol. 2019;180(4):821-827. doi:10.1111/bjd.16921 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The study was approved by the University of California, San Francisco Institutional Review Board with waiver of informed consent.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Methods
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We used 3 different metrics to characterize pollution exposure-fire status, smoke plume density, and PM 2.5 -and obtained consistent results across these metrics for each outcome.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The highest rate ratios for all outcomes were generally seen at exposure lags 0 to 2, which is consistent with short-term exposure to air pollution being associated with rapid effects on the rates of weekly clinic visits and prescribed medications.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the significant associations between air pollution and number of prescribed systemic medications for adults suggest that patients with more severe skin disease were particularly affected by poor air quality or that exposure to air pollution increased the severity of existing skin disease, requiring the initiation of systemic therapy.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Area-level air pollution exposure metrics are a valid proxy for individual patient exposure to wildfire-associated air pollution.
In the paper
“this increased stress during a wildfire could contribute to AD symptoms.57”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [57] 57. California Air Resources Board. Inhalable particulate matter and health (PM2.5 and PM10). Accessed September 1, 2020. https://ww2.arb.ca. gov/resources/inhalable-particulate-matter-and- health 59. Kim E-H, Kim S, Lee JH, et al. Indoor air pollution aggravates symptoms of atopic dermatitis in children. PLoS One. 2015;10(3):e0119501. doi:10. 1371/journal.pone.0119501
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, each model included an offset variable, the logarithm of the weekly total number of dermatology clinic visits for any skin health-related concern, to account for changes in the number of practicing dermatologists and total weekly patient volume both within and across years.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Statistical Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Systemic treatment for asthma flares triggered by wildfire smoke could additionally treat symptoms of AD, mitigating patients' need to seek dermatologic care and possibly resulting in this study capturing underestimated associations between wildfires and skin health.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Area-level air pollution exposure metrics are a valid proxy for individual patient exposure to wildfire-associated air pollution.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we analyzed 3 exposure metrics and found consistent results for all 3 metrics.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“observed associations may be greater at clinics closer to the origin.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Limitations
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Area-level air pollution exposure metrics are a valid proxy for individual patient exposure to wildfire-associated air pollution.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We also focused on patients with AD or itch seen at dermatology clinics and did not include patients at primary care clinics.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This study did not include environmental exposure data on an individual patient level”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Our findings also support studies on long-term PM 2.5 exposure and AD, including indoor air pollution and AD severity in children, 59 AD prevalence among adults, 60 and prenatal pollution exposure.25”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [59] 59. Guo Q, Liang F, Tian L, Schikowski T, Liu W, Pan X. Ambient air pollution and the hospital outpatient visits for eczema and dermatitis in Beijing: a time-stratified case-crossover analysis. Environ Sci Process Impacts. 2019;21(1):163-173. doi:10.1039/ C8EM00494C source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [60] 60. Li A, Fan L, Xie L, Ren Y, Li L. Associations between air pollution, climate factors and outpatient visits for eczema in West China Hospital, Chengdu, south-western China: a time series analysis. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2018;32(3): 486-494. doi:10.1111/jdv.14730 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [25] 25. Morgenstern V, Zutavern A, Cyrys J, et al; GINI Study Group; LISA Study Group. Atopic diseases, allergic sensitization, and exposure to traffic-related air pollution in children. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2008;177(12):1331-1337. doi:10.1164/ rccm.200701-036OC source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Area-level air pollution exposure metrics are a valid proxy for individual patient exposure to wildfire-associated air pollution.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the composition of PM 2.5 during the Camp Fire may not match that of PM 2.5 from other wildfires, which may also limit generalizability of this study's results.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Limitations
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This study suggests that clinics serving affected communities may experience increased visits for certain skin disease exacerbations that decrease patient quality of life and increase health care expenditures.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 08/02/2023
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Area-level air pollution exposure metrics are a valid proxy for individual patient exposure to wildfire-associated air pollution.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“people of color and from low-income communities experience disproportionately increased exposure to air pollution.65,66”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 08/02/2023
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [65]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [66]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The population was restricted to patients living in San Francisco and seeking care at dermatology clinics affiliated with one health care system, which limits the generalizability of our results.”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Health care use rates (clinic visits for AD or itch and prescribed medications) reflect exacerbations of AD and itch symptoms.
“Overall, our findings indicated that both pediatric and adult patients experienced exacerbations of AD and itch symptoms, as measured by health care use rates, in association with short-term exposure to increased air pollution.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The Camp Fire was the primary source of the air pollution spike in San Francisco during the study period, and the comparison periods had no large wildfires near San Francisco.
“Data were collected for 18 weeks encompassing the time before, during, and after the Camp Fire (October 2018-February 2019) as well as for the corresponding dates from previous years when there were no large wildfires close to San Francisco (October 2015-February 2016 and October 2016-February 2017).”
The paper relies on this without support.
Patients residing in San Francisco were exposed to the air pollution measured in San Francisco.
“Patients were excluded if they resided outside San Francisco (approximately 20% of the original group).”
The paper relies on this without support.
The total number of dermatology clinic visits for any skin health-related concern is a valid offset for changes in patient volume and dermatologist numbers.
“In addition, each model included an offset variable, the logarithm of the weekly total number of dermatology clinic visits for any skin health-related concern, to account for changes in the number of practicing dermatologists and total weekly patient volume both within and across years.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 periods are valid controls for the 2018-2019 period.
“Data were collected for 18 weeks encompassing the time before, during, and after the Camp Fire (October 2018-February 2019) as well as for the corresponding dates from previous years when there were no large wildfires close to San Francisco (October 2015-February 2016 and October 2016-February 2017).”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is no unmeasured confounding of the association between wildfire-associated air pollution and health care use for AD or itch.
“The results from the generalized Poisson regression, adjusting for temperature, humidity, and patient age, demonstrated statistically significant associations between exposure to wildfire-associated air pollution and weekly clinic visits for AD in both adult and pediatric patients (Figure 2).”
The paper relies on this without support.
Area-level air pollution exposure metrics are a valid proxy for individual patient exposure to wildfire-associated air pollution.
“This study did not include environmental exposure data on an individual patient level; however, we analyzed 3 exposure metrics and found consistent results for all 3 metrics.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Following the fire, San Francisco experienced a surge in air pollutants such as PM2.5, which triggered a heightened demand for healthcare services for AD and pruritus [26].”
From The Burden of Air Pollution on Skin Health: a Brief Report and Call to Action (2024) · cites this paper as [26]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Studies have shown increased clinic visits during a wildfire for atopic dermatitis and itch in the pediatric population and adults 65 years and older, but not in adults 18–64 [11, 67]”
From Wildfires and Atopic Diseases: A Review (2026) · cites this paper as [11]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“A study exploring the association between a short‐term (2‐week) exposure to wildfire air pollution and health care utilization for AD or itch found a 10‐μg/m3 increase in average PM2.5 concentration was associated with a 5.1% (95% CI, 0.8%–9.7%) increase in the average weekly pediatric AD clinic visits and a 7.7% (95% CI, 1.9%–13.7%) increase in weekly pediatric itch clinic visits.”
From Wildfires and Atopic Diseases: A Review (2026) · cites this paper as [11]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Among adults, the adjusted rate ratios for AD and itch clinic visits were 1.15 (95% CI, 1.02–1.30) and 1.29 (95% CI, 0.96–1.75) times higher compared to non‐fire weeks.”
From Wildfires and Atopic Diseases: A Review (2026) · cites this paper as [11]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Additionally, the adjusted rate ratio for prescribed systemic medications was 1.45 (95% CI, 1.03–2.05) for adults during the fire time interval, compared with non‐fire intervals [11].”
From Wildfires and Atopic Diseases: A Review (2026) · cites this paper as [11]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Abstract
“The adjusted rate ratios for itch clinic visits during the wildfire weeks were 1.82 (95% CI, 1.20-2.78)for the pediatric patients”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Air Pollution and Visits for Itch
“The adjusted rate ratios for weekly pediatric itch visits were 1.82 (95% CI, 1.20-2.77)for fire status”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“Pediatric 363 (52) 103 (53) 116 (51) 150 (54)”
§ Association of Wildfire Air Pollution and Health Care Use for Atopic Dermatitis and Itch > Air Pollution and AD Medications for Adults
Reported 363 · recomputed 369
Citations
Cites
Cohen, A. J., Brauer, M., Burnett, R., Anderson, H. R., Frostad, J., Estep, K., Balakrishnan, K., Brunekreef, B., Dandona, L., Dandona, R., et al. (2017) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(17)30505-6 · Cited by 6,583
Outdoor air pollution and asthma.
Guarnieri, M., & Balmes, J. R. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(14)60617-6 · Cited by 1,889
Self-citationThe Impact of Climate Change on Mental Health: A Systematic Descriptive Review
Cianconi, P., Betrò, S., & Janiri, L. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00074 · Cited by 1,320
Observed Impacts of Anthropogenic Climate Change on Wildfire in California
Williams, P., Abatzoglou, J. T., Gershunov, A., Guzman‐Morales, J., Bishop, D. A., Balch, J. K., & Lettenmaier, D. P. (2019) · Earth s Future · doi:10.1029/2019ef001210 · Cited by 1,166
Flannigan, M., Logan, K. A., Amiro, B. D., Skinner, W. R., & Stocks, B. J. (2005) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1007/s10584-005-5935-y · Cited by 881
Cardiovascular effects of air pollution.
Bourdrel, T., Bind, M.-A., Béjot, Y., Morel, O., & Argacha, J.-F. (2017) · Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases · doi:10.1016/j.acvd.2017.05.003 · Cited by 783
The burden of atopic dermatitis: summary of a report for the National Eczema Association.
Drucker, A. M., Wang, A. R., Li, W.-Q., Sevetson, E., Block, J. K., & Qureshi, A. A. (2017) · Journal of Investigative Dermatology · doi:10.1016/j.jid.2016.07.012 · Cited by 720
Climate change is increasing the likelihood of extreme autumn wildfire conditions across California
Goss, M., Swain, D. L., Abatzoglou, J. T., Sarhadi, A., Kolden, C. A., Williams, P., & Diffenbaugh, N. S. (2020) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab83a7 · Cited by 707
A Generalization of the Poisson Distribution
Consul, P. C., & Jain, G. C. (1973) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1973.10489112 · Cited by 600
Atopic diseases, allergic sensitization, and exposure to traffic-related air pollution in children.
Morgenstern, V., Zutavern, A., Cyrys, J., Brockow, I., Koletzko, S., Krämer, U., Behrendt, H., Herbarth, O., von Berg, A., Bauer, C. P., et al. (2008) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.200701-036oc · Cited by 567
Gehring, U., Wijga, A. H., Brauer, M., Fischer, P., de Jongste, J. C., Kerkhof, M., Oldenwening, M., Smit, H. A., & Brunekreef, B. (2010) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.200906-0858oc · Cited by 494
Disparities in distribution of particulate matter emission sources by race and poverty status.
Mikati, I., Benson, A. F., Luben, T. J., Sacks, J. D., & Richmond-Bryant, J. (2018) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2017.304297 · Cited by 430
Tapinarof is a natural AhR agonist that resolves skin inflammation in mice and humans.
Smith, S. H., Jayawickreme, C., Rickard, D. J., Nicodeme, E., Bui, T., Simmons, C., Coquery, C. M., Neil, J., Pryor, W. M., Mayhew, D., et al. (2017) · Journal of Investigative Dermatology · doi:10.1016/j.jid.2017.05.004 · Cited by 387
Does air pollution play a role in infertility? a systematic review.
Carré, J., Gatimel, N., Moreau, J., Parinaud, J., & Léandri, R. (2017) · Environmental Health · doi:10.1186/s12940-017-0291-8 · Cited by 379
Baulig, A., Garlatti, M., Bonvallot, V., Marchand, A., Barouki, R., Marano, F., & Baeza‐Squiban, A. (2003) · American Journal of Physiology-Lung Cellular and Molecular Physiology · doi:10.1152/ajplung.00419.2002 · Cited by 321
Interactions of climate change, air pollution, and human health.
Kinney, P. L. (2018) · Current Environmental Health Reports · doi:10.1007/s40572-018-0188-x · Cited by 317
Cushing, L., Morello-Frosch, R., Wander, M., & Pastor, M. (2015) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031914-122646 · Cited by 304
Hidaka, T., Ogawa, E., Kobayashi, E. H., Suzuki, T., Funayama, R., Nagashima, T., Fujimura, T., Aiba, S., Nakayama, K., Okuyama, R., et al. (2017) · Nature Immunology · doi:10.1038/ni.3614 · Cited by 274
Wettstein, Z. S., Hoshiko, S., Fahimi, J., Harrison, R. J., Cascio, W. E., & Rappold, A. G. (2018) · Journal of the American Heart Association · doi:10.1161/jaha.117.007492 · Cited by 257
The impact of climate change on wildfire severity: A regional forecast for Northern California
Fried, J. S., Torn, M. S., & Mills, E. (2004) · Climatic Change · doi:10.1023/b:clim.0000024667.89579.ed · Cited by 250
Kim, K. H. (2013) · Asia Pacific Allergy · doi:10.5415/apallergy.2013.3.2.79 · Cited by 246
Finlay, S. E., Moffat, A., Gazzard, R., Baker, D., & Murray, V. (2012) · PLoS Currents · doi:10.1371/4f959951cce2c · Cited by 226
Pénard-Morand, C., Charpin, D., Rahérison, C., Kopferschmitt, C., Caillaud, D. M., Lavaud, F., & Annesi‐Maesano, I. (2005) · Clinical & Experimental Allergy · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.2005.02336.x · Cited by 203
Symptoms of atopic dermatitis are influenced by outdoor air pollution.
Kim, J., Kim, E.-H., Oh, I., Jung, K., Han, Y., Cheong, H.-K., & Ahn, K. (2013) · Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2013.04.019 · Cited by 198
Alman, B. L., Pfister, G. G., Hao, H., Stowell, J., Hu, X., Liu, Y., & Strickland, M. J. (2016) · Environmental Health · doi:10.1186/s12940-016-0146-8 · Cited by 173
Tauchi, M., Hida, A., Negishi, T., Katsuoka, F., Noda, S., Mimura, J., Hosoya, T., Yanaka, A., Aburatani, H., Fujii-Kuriyama, Y., et al. (2005) · Molecular and Cellular Biology · doi:10.1128/mcb.25.21.9360-9368.2005 · Cited by 167
Acute health effects of urban fine and ultrafine particles on children with atopic dermatitis.
Song, S., Lee, K., Lee, Y.-M., Lee, J.-H., Il Lee, S., Yu, S.-D., & Paek, D. (2011) · Environmental Research · doi:10.1016/j.envres.2010.10.010 · Cited by 162
Overview of atopic dermatitis.
Avena-Woods, C. (2017) · PubMed · Cited by 155
Niwa, Y., Sumi, H., Kawahira, K., Terashima, T., Nakamura, T., & Akamatsu, H. (2003) · British Journal of Dermatology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2133.2003.05417.x · Cited by 152
Modeling underdispersed count data with generalized Poisson regression.
Harris, T., Yang, Z., & Hardin, J. W. (2012) · The Stata Journal: Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · doi:10.1177/1536867x1201200412 · Cited by 150
The ISAAC Phase One Study Group, Asher, M. I., Stewart, A. W., Mallol, J., Montefort, S., Lai, C. K., Aït-Khaled, N., & Odhiambo, J. (2010) · Respiratory Research · doi:10.1186/1465-9921-11-8 · Cited by 144
Aguilera, I., Pedersen, M., Garcia-Esteban, R., Ballester, F., Basterrechea, M., Esplugues, A., Fernández-Somoano, A., Lertxundi, A., Tardón, A., & Sunyer, J. (2013) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.1205281 · Cited by 143
Paller, A. S., Stein Gold, L., Soung, J., Tallman, A. M., Rubenstein, D. S., & Gooderham, M. (2021) · Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2020.05.135 · Cited by 138
Traffic-Related Air Pollution, Climate, and Prevalence of Eczema in Taiwanese School Children
Lee, Y.-L., Su, H.-J., Sheu, H.-M., Yu, H.-S., & Guo, Y. L. (2008) · Journal of Investigative Dermatology · doi:10.1038/jid.2008.110 · Cited by 128
Association of pollution and climate with atopic eczema in US children.
Kathuria, P., & Silverberg, J. I. (2016) · Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · doi:10.1111/pai.12543 · Cited by 127
Drakaki, E., Dessinioti, C., & Antoniou, C. V. (2014) · Frontiers in Environmental Science · doi:10.3389/fenvs.2014.00011 · Cited by 126
Weber, S. U., Thiele, J. J., Packer, L., & Cross, C. E. (1999) · Journal of Investigative Dermatology · doi:10.1046/j.1523-1747.1999.00789.x · Cited by 125
The impact of airborne pollution on atopic dermatitis: a literature review
Hendricks, A. J., Eichenfield, L. F., & Shi, V. Y. (2019) · British Journal of Dermatology · doi:10.1111/bjd.18781 · Cited by 104
Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor Is an Ozone Sensor in Human Skin
Afaq, F., Zaid, M. A., Pelle, E., Khan, N., Syed, D. N., Matsui, M. S., Maes, D., & Mukhtar, H. (2009) · Journal of Investigative Dermatology · doi:10.1038/jid.2009.85 · Cited by 99
Choi, H., Shin, D. W., Kim, W., Doh, S.-J., Lee, S. H., & Noh, M. (2011) · Toxicology Letters · doi:10.1016/j.toxlet.2010.10.019 · Cited by 88
Influences of environmental chemicals on atopic dermatitis.
Kim, K. (2015) · Toxicological Research · doi:10.5487/tr.2015.31.2.089 · Cited by 85
Indoor Air Pollution Aggravates Symptoms of Atopic Dermatitis in Children
Kim, E.-H., Kim, S., Lee, J. H., Kim, J., Han, Y., Kim, Y.-M., Kim, G.-B., Jung, K., Cheong, H.-K., & Ahn, K. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0119501 · Cited by 82
Ozone depletes tocopherols and tocotrienols topically applied to murine skin.
Thiele, J. J., Traber, M. G., Podda, M., Tsang, K., Cross, C. E., & Packer, L. (1997) · FEBS Letters · doi:10.1016/s0014-5793(96)01463-9 · Cited by 79
Prenatal air pollutant exposure and occurrence of atopic dermatitis.
Huang, C. C., Wen, H. J., Chen, P. C., Chiang, T. L., Lin, S. J., & Guo, Y. L. (2015) · British Journal of Dermatology · doi:10.1111/bjd.14039 · Cited by 78
Li, A., Fan, L., Xie, L., Ren, Y., & Li, L. (2018) · Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology · doi:10.1111/jdv.14730 · Cited by 77
Adult atopic dermatitis and exposure to air pollutants—a nationwide population-based study
Tang, K.-T., Ku, K.-C., Chen, D.-Y., Lin, C.-H., Tsuang, B.-J., & Chen, Y.-H. (2017) · Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.anai.2016.12.005 · Cited by 73
Ushio, H., Nohara, K., & Fujimaki, H. (1999) · Toxicology Letters · doi:10.1016/s0378-4274(98)00379-8 · Cited by 68
Mochizuki, H., Lavery, M. J., Nattkemper, L. A., Albornoz, C., Valdes Rodriguez, R., Stull, C., Weaver, L., Hamsher, J., Sanders, K. M., Chan, Y. H., et al. (2019) · British Journal of Dermatology · doi:10.1111/bjd.16921 · Cited by 64
Lee, Y., Li, C.-W., Sung, F., Yu, H.-S., Sheu, H., & Guo, Y. L. (2007) · British Journal of Dermatology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2007.08215.x · Cited by 58
Recent Increases in Air Pollution: Evidence and Implications for Mortality
Clay, K., & Muller, N. (2019) · doi:10.3386/w26381 · Cited by 51
Traffic-related air pollution and eczema in the elderly: findings from the SALIA cohort.
Schnass, W., Hüls, A., Vierkötter, A., Krämer, U., Krutmann, J., & Schikowski, T. (2018) · International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health · doi:10.1016/j.ijheh.2018.06.002 · Cited by 50
Ma, C., Wang, J., & Luo, J. (2004) · Biochemical Pharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.bcp.2004.01.023 · Cited by 43
Hüls, A., Klümper, C., MacIntyre, E., Brauer, M. D., Melén, E., Bauer, M., Berdel, D., Bergström, A., Brunekreef, B., Chan‐Yeung, M., et al. (2018) · Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · doi:10.1111/pai.12903 · Cited by 43
Guo, Q., Liang, F., Tian, L., Schikowski, T., Liu, W., & Pan, X. (2019) · Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts · doi:10.1039/c8em00494c · Cited by 43
Extreme Wildfires—A Growing Population Health and Planetary Problem
Kizer, K. W. (2020) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2020.19334 · Cited by 38
Traffic-Related Air Pollution, Climate, and Prevalence of Eczema in Taiwanese School Children
Lee, Y., Liang, P., Su, H.-J. J., Sheu, H., Yu, H., & Guo, Y. L. (2008) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/01.ede.0000339872.93481.eb · Cited by 16
Mochizuki (2019) · British Journal of Dermatology · doi:10.1111/bjd.2019.180.issue-4 · Cited by 14
Atopic diseases, allergic sensitisation and exposure to traffic-related air pollution in children
Morgenstern, V., Zutavern, A., Cyrys, J., Brockow, I., Koletzko, S., Krämer, U., Behrendt, H., Herbarth, O., Berg, A. V., Bauer, C. P., et al. (2007) · World Allergy Organization Journal · doi:10.1097/01.wox.0000301897.08532.d6 · Cited by 7
Li (2018) · Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology · doi:10.1111/jdv.2018.32.issue-3 · Cited by 5
Lee (2007) · British Journal of Dermatology · doi:10.1111/bjd.2007.157.issue-6 · Cited by 4
Hüls (2018) · Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · doi:10.1111/pai.2018.29.issue-6 · Cited by 1
Pénard-Morand (2005) · Clinical & Experimental Allergy · doi:10.1111/cea.2005.35.issue-10 · Cited by 1
Cardiovascular effects of air pollution: a review
Bourdrel, T., Reeb, T., Morel, O., et al. (2017) · Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases Supplements · doi:10.1016/s1878-6480(17)30314-2
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP), 2019, Wildfires in California: Emergency Department Visits Around November 2018., 65
- Ruminski, 2007, Use of Environmental Satellite Imagery for Smoke Depiction and Transport Model Initialization., 16
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Climate change and global health: a call to more research and more action
Agache, I., Sampath, V., Aguilera, J., Akdis, C. A., Akdis, M., Barry, M., Bouagnon, A., Chinthrajah, S., Collins, W., Dulitzki, C., et al. (2022) · Allergy · doi:10.1111/all.15229 · Cited by 183
Health Effects of Wildfire Smoke Exposure
Gould, C. F., Heft‐Neal, S., Johnson, M. M. D., Aguilera, J., Burke, M., & Nadeau, K. C. (2023) · Annual Review of Medicine · doi:10.1146/annurev-med-052422-020909 · Cited by 217
Climate Change, Skin Health, and Dermatologic Disease: A Guide for the Dermatologist
Belzer, A., & Parker, E. R. (2023) · American Journal of Clinical Dermatology · doi:10.1007/s40257-023-00770-y · Cited by 109
“5 due to wildfires likely increase the burden of dermatologic disease, an acute association between wildfires and AD has also been demonstrated [83].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialEnvironmental Air Pollutants Affecting Skin Functions with Systemic Implications
Bocheva, G., Slominski, R. M., & Slominski, A. T. (2023) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms241310502 · Cited by 94
Reframing racial and ethnic disparities in atopic dermatitis in Black and Latinx populations
Croce, E. A., Levy, M. L., Adamson, A. S., & Matsui, E. C. (2021) · Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2021.09.015 · Cited by 90
Metadata
- Authors
- Fadadu, R. P., Grimes, B., Jewell, N. P., Vargo, J., Young, A. T., Abuabara, K., Balmes, J. R., & Wei, M. L.
- Affiliations
- San Francisco VA Medical Center (US)
- University of California, San Francisco (US)
- London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
- California Department of Public Health (US)
- Corresponding author
- Wei, Maria L.
- ORCID
- Venue
- JAMA Dermatology
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2021-06-01
- Volume
- 157
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 658
- ISSN
- 2168-6068 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC8060890
- OpenAlex
- W3155248034
- Cited by
- 120
- References
- 65
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 7
- FWCI
- 8.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- JAMA Dermatology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Air Quality and Health Impacts
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Dermatology and Skin Diseases
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Asthma and respiratory diseases
- Keywords
- atopic dermatitis, pruritus, PM2.5, prescription drugs, pediatric patients, adult patients, inflammatory skin diseases, San Francisco, wildfire smoke exposure, topical corticosteroids, antihistamines, phototherapy
- MeSH terms
- Wildfires, Adult, Air Pollution, Child, Cross-Sectional Studies, Delivery of Health Care, Dermatitis, Atopic, Environmental Exposure, Female, Humans, Particulate Matter
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
