Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,016

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Epidemiological time series studies of PM2.5and daily mortality and hospital admissions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Atkinson, R W, Kang, S, Anderson, H R, Mills, I C, Walton, H A·2014·Thorax

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Short-term exposure to outdoor fine particulate matter (particles with a median aerodynamic diameter <2.5 μm (PM2.5)) air pollution has been associated with adverse health effects. Existing literature reviews have been limited in size and scope. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive, systematic review and meta-analysis of 110 peer-reviewed time series studies indexed in medical databases to May 2011 to assess the evidence for associations between PM2.5 and daily mortality and hospital admissions for a range of diseases and ages. We stratified our analyses by geographical region to determine the consistency of the evidence worldwide and investigated small study bias. RESULTS: Based upon 23 estimates for all-cause mortality, a 10 µg/m(3) increment in PM2.5 was associated with a 1.04% (95% CI 0.52% to 1.56%) increase in the risk of death. Worldwide, there was substantial regional variation (0.25% to 2.08%). Associations for respiratory causes of death were larger than for cardiovascular causes, 1.51% (1.01% to 2.01%) vs 0.84% (0.41% to 1.28%). Positive associations with mortality for most other causes of death and for cardiovascular and respiratory hospital admissions were also observed. We found evidence for small study bias in single-city mortality studies and in multicity studies of cardiovascular disease. CONCLUSIONS: The consistency of the evidence for adverse health effects of short-term exposure to PM2.5 across a range of important health outcomes and diseases supports policy measures to control PM2.5 concentrations. However, reasons for heterogeneity in effect estimates in different regions of the world require further investigation. Small study bias should also be considered in assessing and quantifying health risks from PM2.5.

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 · 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2013-204492

Cites

5 of 5 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 5 references

Cited by

See all 1,016

Metadata

Authors
Atkinson, R. W., Kang, S., Anderson, H. R., Mills, I. C., & Walton, H. A.
Venue
Thorax
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2014-04-04
Volume
69
Issue
7
Pages
660-665
ISSN
  • 0040-6376 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3296
OpenAlex
W2103639573
Cited by
1,016
References
5
FWCI
7.95
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: Epidemiological time series studies of PM2.5and daily mortality and hospital admissions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2013-204492
The paper
Atkinson, R. W., Kang, S., Anderson, H. R., Mills, I. C., & Walton, H. A. (2014). Epidemiological time series studies of PM2.5and daily mortality and hospital admissions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Thorax. https://doi.org/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2013-204492

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.