Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 103

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 61 of the 61 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Associations of long-term exposure to air pollution and road traffic noise with cognitive function—An analysis of effect measure modification

Tzivian, Lilian, Jokisch, Martha, Winkler, Angela, Weimar, Christian, Hennig, Frauke, Sugiri, Dorothea, Soppa, Vanessa J., Dragano, Nico, Erbel, Raimund, Jöckel, Karl-Heinz, Moebus, Susanne, Hoffmann, Barbara·2017·Environment International
DOI 10.1016/j.envint.2017.03.018
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background Adverse effects of traffic-related air pollution (AP) and noise on cognitive functions have been proposed, but little is known about their interactions and the combined effect of co-exposure. Methods Cognitive assessment was completed by 4086 participants of the population-based Heinz Nixdorf Recall cohort study using five neuropsychological subtests and an additively calculated global cognitive score (GCS). We assessed long-term residential concentrations for size-fractioned particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen oxides with land use regression. Road traffic noise (weighted 24-h (L DEN ) and night-time (L NIGHT ) means) was assessed according to the EU directive 2002/49/EC. Linear regression models adjusted for individual-level characteristics were calculated to estimate effect modification of associations between AP and noise with cognitive function. We used multiplicative interaction terms and categories of single or double high exposure, dichotomizing the potential effect modifier at the median (AP) or at an a priori defined threshold (road traffic noise). Results In fully adjusted models, high noise exposure increased the association of AP with cognitive function. For example, for an interquartile range increase of PM 2.5 (IQR 1.43), association s with GCS were: estimate (β)=-0.16 [95% confidence interval: -0.33; 0.01] and β=-0.48 [-0.72; -0.23] for low and high L DEN , respectively. The association of noise with GCS was restricted to highly AP-exposed participa…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.envint.2017.03.018

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. European Commission, 2002, Directive 2002/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 June 2002 relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise, Off. J. Eur. Union

Cited by

See all 103

Metadata

Authors
Tzivian, L., Jokisch, M., Winkler, A., Weimar, C., Hennig, F., Sugiri, D., Soppa, V. J., Dragano, N., Erbel, R., Jöckel, K.-H., Moebus, S., & Hoffmann, B.
Venue
Environment International
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-06
Volume
103
Pages
30-38
ISSN
0160-4120
DOI
10.1016/j.envint.2017.03.018
Cited by
103
References
61
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Funders
  • German Ministry of Education and Science
  • German Research Council (3314/2-3, 3314/4-3, 155/6-2, 236/10-1)

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.

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.