Cited by 60Energy and Environment ImpactsTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyIndoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure

Indoor air pollution from solid fuel and tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lin, H-H., Suk, C-W., Lo, H-L., Huang, R-Y., Enarson, D. A., Chiang, C-Y.·2014·The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To conduct an updated systematic review and meta-analysis on the association between indoor air pollution and tuberculosis (TB). DESIGN: We searched for English or Chinese articles using PubMed and EMBASE up to 28 February 2013. We aimed to identify randomised controlled trials and observational epidemiological studies that reported the association between domestic use of solid fuel and TB. Two reviewers independently extracted the information from included studies and assessed the risk of bias of these studies using pre-defined criteria. The effect sizes of eligible studies were pooled using a random-effects model; the heterogeneity across studies was quantified using I(2) statistics. RESULTS: We identified 15 studies on solid fuel use and active TB and one on solid fuel use and latent tuberculous infection. The summary odds ratios from case-control and cross-sectional studies were respectively 1.17 (95%CI 0.83 - 1.65) and 1.62 (95%CI 0.89 - 2.93), with substantial between-study heterogeneity (I(2) 56.2% and 80.5%, respectively). Subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis did not identify any study-level factors that could explain the heterogeneity observed. CONCLUSION: The level of evidence for the association between domestic use of solid fuels and TB was very low. High-quality studies are badly needed to clarify this association and to estimate the magnitude of the problem.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5588/ijtld.13.0765

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lin, H.-H., Suk, C.-W., Lo, H.-L., Huang, R.-Y., Enarson, D. A., & Chiang, C.-Y.
Affiliations
  • National Taiwan University (TW)
  • Wan Fang Hospital (TW)
  • Mennonite Christian Hospital (TW)
  • International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (FR)
Venue
The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease
Published
2014-05-01
Volume
18
Issue
5
Pages
613-621
ISSN
  • 1027-3719 (ISSN-L)
  • 1815-7920
OpenAlex
W2048350162
Cited by
60
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3
FWCI
4.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Taipei Medical University Repository (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Energy and Environment Impacts
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Tuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Indoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure
Keywords
indoor air pollution, solid fuel use, tuberculosis, latent tuberculosis infection, household fuel, active tuberculosis, risk factors
MeSH terms
Coal, Cooking, Energy-Generating Resources, Feces, Heating, Housing, Humans, Risk Factors, Tuberculosis, Pulmonary, Wood, Chi-Square Distribution, Odds Ratio, Air Pollution, Indoor, Biomass, Risk Assessment, Inhalation Exposure

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