Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 269

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 96 of the 96 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Air pollution exposure and depression: A comprehensive updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Borroni, Elisa, Pesatori, Angela Cecilia, Bollati, Valentina, Buoli, Massimiliano, Carugno, Michele·2022·Environmental Pollution

Abstract

We provide a comprehensive and updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the association between air pollution exposure and depression, searching PubMed, Embase, and Web of Sciences for relevant articles published up to May 2021, and eventually including 39 studies. Meta-analyses were performed separately according to pollutant type [particulate matter with diameter ≤10 μm (PM10) and ≤2.5 μm (PM2.5), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), ozone (O3), and carbon monoxide (CO)] and exposure duration [short- (<30 days) and long-term (≥30 days)]. Test for homogeneity based on Cochran's Q and I2 statistics were calculated and the restricted maximum likelihood (REML) random effect model was applied. We assessed overall quality of pooled estimates, influence of single studies on the meta-analytic estimates, sources of between-study heterogeneity, and publication bias. We observed an increased risk of depression associated with long-term exposure to PM2.5 (relative risk: 1.074, 95% confidence interval: 1.021–1.129) and NO2 (1.037, 1.011–1.064), and with short-term exposure to PM10 (1.009, 1.006–1.012), PM2.5 (1.009, 1.007–1.011), NO2 (1.022, 1.012–1.033), SO2 (1.024, 1.010–1.037), O3 (1.011, 0.997–1.026), and CO (1.062, 1.020–1.105). The publication bias affecting half of the investigated associations and the high heterogeneity characterizing most of the meta-analytic estimates partly prevent to draw very firm conclusions. On the other hand, the coherence of all the estimates after excluding single studies in the sensitivity analysis supports the soundness of our results. This especially applies to the association between PM2.5 and depression, strengthened by the absence of heterogeneity and of relevant publication bias in both long- and short-term exposure studies. Should further investigations be designed, they should involve large sample sizes, well-defined diagnostic criteria for depression, and thorough control of potential confounding factors. Finally, studies dedicated to the comprehension of the mechanisms underlying the association between air pollution and depression remain necessary.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.envpol.2021.118245

Cites

96 of 96 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 96 references

Cited by

See all 269

Metadata

Authors
Borroni, E., Pesatori, A. C., Bollati, V., Buoli, M., & Carugno, M.
Venue
Environmental Pollution
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-01
Volume
292
Issue
Pt A
Pages
118245
ISSN
0269-7491 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3202078365
Cited by
269
References
96
FWCI
5.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Air pollution exposure and depression: A comprehensive updated systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.envpol.2021.118245
The paper
Borroni, E., Pesatori, A. C., Bollati, V., Buoli, M., & Carugno, M. (2022). Air pollution exposure and depression: A comprehensive updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Environmental Pollution. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2021.118245

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.