Cited by 674Air Quality and Health ImpactsIndoor Air Quality and Microbial ExposureAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols

Fine particles and human health—a review of epidemiological studies

Englert, N·2004·Toxicology Letters

Abstract

Adverse health effects of exposure to particles have been described in numerous epidemiological studies. Health endpoints thoroughly studied are all cause and cause-specific mortality, and hospital admissions. Older studies focussed on associations with PM10 (then named fine particles). During the last decade, PM2.5 was increasingly emphasised, and the term "fine particles" was restricted to this size fraction. Currently, ultrafine particles (UF, PM0.1) are discussed to be another important fraction which should be characterised by particle number instead of particle mass. However, data on UF exposure and health effects are still limited. The mechanisms by which particles influence human health are only poorly understood. Under discussion is the role of particle size and particle composition. The risk assessment of coarse particles (i.e. the size fraction between 2.5 and 10 microm) suffers from inconsistent findings. The question of causality is not completely answered. However, it is widely accepted that PM is some kind of container including components which are toxicologically relevant and others which might be seen mainly as indicators. Thus, the local mix may influence the toxicological potency of PM, and results from studies carried out in one region may not necessarily be consistent with results gained elsewhere. Recently, reanalyses of epidemiological studies performed by the Health Effects Institute (HEI) qualitatively confirmed the original results. New insight in the influence of socioeconomic factors extended the knowledge on health effects of particles. To some extent, the slope of the dose response relationships from time-series analyses needed downward adjustment due to some problems with statistical analysis programmes. Nevertheless, the whole body of knowledge supports the role of PM as a type of air pollution with great influence on human health.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.toxlet.2003.12.035

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Englert, N.
Affiliations
German Environment Agency (DE)
Corresponding author
Englert, N
Venue
Toxicology Letters
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-04-01
Volume
149
Issue
1-3
Pages
235-242
ISSN
0378-4274 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2013616203
Cited by
674
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 50 · 2015: 42 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 28
FWCI
21.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Toxicology Letters (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Air Quality and Health Impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Indoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Keywords
fine particles, particulate matter, PM2.5, ultrafine particles, PM0.1, coarse particles, air pollution health effects, mortality, hospitalization, particle size, particle composition, particle number concentration, dose-response relationship, socioeconomic factors, causality
MeSH terms
Air Pollutants, Animals, Epidemiologic Methods, Humans, Particle Size, Population Surveillance, Time Factors, Epidemiologic Studies, Endpoint Determination

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