Cited by 12Air Quality and Health ImpactsData-Driven Disease SurveillanceClimate Change and Health Impacts

Associations between wildfire air pollution and online search interest for skin diseases and symptoms

Open access
Fadadu, Raj P., Chen, Jennifer Yuying, Wei, Maria L.·2022·JAAD International

Abstract

To the Editor: Wildfires are becoming more frequent and severe, causing increased air pollution exposure.1 Wildfire smoke has been associated with increased rates of clinic visits for atopic dermatitis (AD) and itch.1 We hypothesized that exposure to local wildfire air pollution would increase interest in skin-related topics, as detected by online search trends. They reflect shifts in population-level information-seeking behaviors related to short-term events that could indicate environmental impacts on skin health.

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.jdin.2022.06.014

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • A Google search volume index analysis during the 2020 California Lightning Complex fires showed a 10 μg/m3 increase in mean weekly PM2.5 was associated with an increased mean weekly SVI for "eczema," "itchy," and "red skin".

    “Furthermore, a Google search volume index (SVI) analysis conducted on AD‐symptom search terms during the 2020 California Lightning Complex fires showed a 10 μg/m3 increase in mean weekly PM2.5 was associated with an increased mean weekly SVI for “eczema,” “itchy,” and “red skin” [27].”

    From Wildfires and Atopic Diseases: A Review (2026) · cites this paper as [27]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fadadu, R. P., Chen, J. Y., & Wei, M. L.
Affiliations
University of California, San Francisco (US)
Corresponding author
Wei, Maria L.
Venue
JAAD International
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-09
Volume
8
Pages
128-130
ISSN
2666-3287 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4283073938
Cited by
12
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5
FWCI
0.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAAD International (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Air Quality and Health Impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Data-Driven Disease Surveillance
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Climate Change and Health Impacts
Keywords
wildfire smoke, air pollution, internet search trends, skin diseases, atopic dermatitis, pruritus, information seeking, environmental health, skin health

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