For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
15
views
40
references
 Top references
cited by
44
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      231
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Air Pollution and Pulmonary Tuberculosis: A Nested Case–Control Study among Members of a Northern California Health Plan

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background:

          Ecologic analyses, case–case comparisons, and animal experiments suggest positive associations between air pollution and tuberculosis.

          Objectives:

          We evaluated this hypothesis in a large sample, which yielded results that are applicable to the general population.

          Methods:

          We conducted a case–control study nested within a cohort of Kaiser Permanente of Northern California members. All active pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) cases newly diagnosed between 1996 and 2010 (n = 2,309) were matched to two controls (n = 4,604) by age, sex, and race/ethnicity on the index date corresponding with the case diagnosis date. Average individual-level concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), ozone (O3), and particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter ≤ 2.5 μm (PM2.5) and 10 μm (PM10) for 2 years before diagnosis/entry into the study were estimated using measurements from the California Air Resources Board monitor closest to the participant’s residence.

          Results:

          In single-pollutant adjusted conditional logistic regression models, the pulmonary TB odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for the highest quintile (vs. lowest) were 1.50 (95% CI: 1.15, 1.95) for CO and 1.42 (95% CI: 1.10, 1.84) for NO2. Corresponding estimates were higher among never [1.68 (95% CI: 1.26, 2.24)] than ever [1.19 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.92)] smokers for CO. In contrast, for NO2, estimates were higher among ever [1.81 (95% CI: 1.13, 2.91)] than never [1.29 (95% CI: 0.97, 1.71)] smokers. O3 was inversely associated for smokers [0.66 (95% CI: 0.43, 1.02)] and never smokers [0.65 (95% CI: 0.52, 0.81)]. No other consistent patterns were observed.

          Conclusions:

          In this first, to our knowledge, U.S. nested case–control study on air pollution and pulmonary TB, we observed positive associations with ambient CO and NO2, which require confirmation.

          Citation:

          Smith GS, Van Den Eeden SK, Garcia C, Shan J, Baxter R, Herring AH, Richardson DB, Van Rie A, Emch M, Gammon MD. 2016. Air pollution and pulmonary tuberculosis: a nested case-control study among members of a Northern California health plan. Environ Health Perspect 124:761–768; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1408166

          Related collections

          Most cited references40

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          A review of land-use regression models to assess spatial variation of outdoor air pollution

          Gerard Hoek, Rob Beelen, Kees de Hoogh … (2008)
          Article 0 comments Cited 216 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A review and evaluation of intraurban air pollution exposure models.

            Michael Jerrett, Altaf Arain, Pavlos S Kanaroglou … (2005)
            The development of models to assess air pollution exposures within cities for assignment to subjects in health studies has been identified as a priority area for future research. This paper reviews models for assessing intraurban exposure under six classes, including: (i) proximity-based assessments, (ii) statistical interpolation, (iii) land use regression models, (iv) line dispersion models, (v) integrated emission-meteorological models, and (vi) hybrid models combining personal or household exposure monitoring with one of the preceding methods. We enrich this review of the modelling procedures and results with applied examples from Hamilton, Canada. In addition, we qualitatively evaluate the models based on key criteria important to health effects assessment research. Hybrid models appear well suited to overcoming the problem of achieving population representative samples while understanding the role of exposure variation at the individual level. Remote sensing and activity-space analysis will complement refinements in pre-existing methods, and with expected advances, the field of exposure assessment may help to reduce scientific uncertainties that now impede policy intervention aimed at protecting public health.
            Article 0 comments Cited 210 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A Cohort Study of Traffic-Related Air Pollution Impacts on Birth Outcomes

              Michael Brauer, Cornel Lencar, Lillian Tamburic … (2008)
              Background Evidence suggests that air pollution exposure adversely affects pregnancy outcomes. Few studies have examined individual-level intraurban exposure contrasts. Objectives We evaluated the impacts of air pollution on small for gestational age (SGA) birth weight, low full-term birth weight (LBW), and preterm birth using spatiotemporal exposure metrics. Methods With linked administrative data, we identified 70,249 singleton births (1999–2002) with complete covariate data (sex, ethnicity, parity, birth month and year, income, education) and maternal residential history in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. We estimated residential exposures by month of pregnancy using nearest and inverse-distance weighting (IDW) of study area monitors [carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, nitric oxide, ozone, sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter < 2.5 (PM2.5) or < 10 (PM10) μm in aerodynamic diameter], temporally adjusted land use regression (LUR) models (NO, NO2, PM2.5, black carbon), and proximity to major roads. Using logistic regression, we estimated the risk of mean (entire pregnancy, first and last month of pregnancy, first and last 3 months) air pollution concentrations on SGA (< 10th percentile), term LBW (< 2,500 g), and preterm birth. Results Residence within 50 m of highways was associated with a 26% increase in SGA [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.07–1.49] and an 11% (95% CI, 1.01–1.23) increase in LBW. Exposure to all air pollutants except O3 was associated with SGA, with similar odds ratios (ORs) for LUR and monitoring estimates (e.g., LUR: OR = 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00–1.04; IDW: OR = 1.05; 95% CI, 1.03–1.08 per 10-μg/m3 increase in NO). For preterm births, associations were observed with PM2.5 for births < 37 weeks gestation (and for other pollutants at < 30 weeks). No consistent patterns suggested exposure windows of greater relevance. Conclusion Associations between traffic-related air pollution and birth outcomes were observed in a population-based cohort with relatively low ambient air pollution exposure.
              Article 0 comments Cited 168 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Environ Health Perspect
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Environ. Health Perspect
                Journal ID (publisher-id): EHP
                Title: Environmental Health Perspectives
                Publisher: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
                ISSN (Print): 0091-6765
                ISSN (Electronic): 1552-9924
                Publication date (Electronic): 9 February 2016
                Publication date (Print): June 2016
                Volume: 124
                Issue: 6
                Pages: 761-768
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
                [2 ]Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, California, USA
                [3 ]California Air Resources Board, Sacramento, California, USA
                [4 ]Department of Biostatistics,
                [5 ]Carolina Population Center, and
                [6 ]Department of Geography, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
                Author notes
                [† ]Address correspondence to G.S. Smith, Department of Epidemiology, CB# 7435 McGavran-Greenberg Hall, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7435 USA. Telephone: (919) 966-7421. E-mail: genee@ 123456unc.edu
                Article
                Publisher ID: ehp.1408166
                DOI: 10.1289/ehp.1408166
                PMC ID: 4892908
                PubMed ID: 26859438
                SO-VID: 24e3db38-1f49-4e8c-8391-ab7be4e5e1b4
                License:

                Publication of EHP lies in the public domain and is therefore without copyright. All text from EHP may be reprinted freely. Use of materials published in EHP should be acknowledged (for example, “Reproduced with permission from Environmental Health Perspectives”); pertinent reference information should be provided for the article from which the material was reproduced. Articles from EHP, especially the News section, may contain photographs or illustrations copyrighted by other commercial organizations or individuals that may not be used without obtaining prior approval from the holder of the copyright.

                History
                Date received : 22 January 2014
                Date revision received : 23 June 2015
                Date accepted : 27 January 2016
                Date: 9 February 2016
                Categories
                Subject: Research

                ScienceOpen disciplines: Public health
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: Public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content231

                See all similar

                Cited by43

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors358

                See all reference authors