儿童燃气烹饪与呼吸系统的影响:一项系统综述

Wenchao Li , Christopher Long , Tongyao Fan , Elyssa Anneser , Jiayang Chien , Julie E. Goodman
{"title":"儿童燃气烹饪与呼吸系统的影响:一项系统综述","authors":"Wenchao Li ,&nbsp;Christopher Long ,&nbsp;Tongyao Fan ,&nbsp;Elyssa Anneser ,&nbsp;Jiayang Chien ,&nbsp;Julie E. Goodman","doi":"10.1016/j.gloepi.2023.100107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The most recent meta-analysis of gas cooking and respiratory outcomes in children was conducted by Lin et al. [<span>93</span>] in 2013. Since then, a number of epidemiology studies have been published on this topic. We conducted the first systematic review of this epidemiology literature that includes an in-depth evaluation of study heterogeneity and study quality, neither of which was systematically evaluated in earlier reviews. We reviewed a total of 66 relevant studies, including those in the Lin et al. [<span>93</span>] meta-analysis. Most of the studies are cross-sectional by design, precluding causal inference. Only a few are cohort studies that could establish temporality and they have largely reported null results. There is large variability across studies in terms of study region, age of children, gas cooking exposure definition, and asthma or wheeze outcome definition, precluding clear interpretations of meta-analysis estimates such as those reported in Lin et al. [<span>93</span>]. Further, our systematic study quality evaluation reveals that a large proportion of the studies to date are subject to multiple sources of bias and inaccuracy, primarily due to self-reported gas cooking exposure or respiratory outcomes, insufficient adjustment for key confounders (e.g., environmental tobacco smoke, family history of asthma or allergies, socioeconomic status or home environment), and unestablished temporality. We conclude that the epidemiology literature is limited by high heterogeneity and low study quality and, therefore, it does not provide sufficient evidence regarding causal relationships between gas cooking or indoor NO<sub>2</sub> and asthma or wheeze. We caution against over-interpreting the quantitative evidence synthesis estimates from meta-analyses of these studies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36311,"journal":{"name":"Global Epidemiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/1f/6e/main.PMC10446006.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gas cooking and respiratory outcomes in children: A systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Wenchao Li ,&nbsp;Christopher Long ,&nbsp;Tongyao Fan ,&nbsp;Elyssa Anneser ,&nbsp;Jiayang Chien ,&nbsp;Julie E. Goodman\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.gloepi.2023.100107\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The most recent meta-analysis of gas cooking and respiratory outcomes in children was conducted by Lin et al. [<span>93</span>] in 2013. Since then, a number of epidemiology studies have been published on this topic. We conducted the first systematic review of this epidemiology literature that includes an in-depth evaluation of study heterogeneity and study quality, neither of which was systematically evaluated in earlier reviews. We reviewed a total of 66 relevant studies, including those in the Lin et al. [<span>93</span>] meta-analysis. Most of the studies are cross-sectional by design, precluding causal inference. Only a few are cohort studies that could establish temporality and they have largely reported null results. There is large variability across studies in terms of study region, age of children, gas cooking exposure definition, and asthma or wheeze outcome definition, precluding clear interpretations of meta-analysis estimates such as those reported in Lin et al. [<span>93</span>]. Further, our systematic study quality evaluation reveals that a large proportion of the studies to date are subject to multiple sources of bias and inaccuracy, primarily due to self-reported gas cooking exposure or respiratory outcomes, insufficient adjustment for key confounders (e.g., environmental tobacco smoke, family history of asthma or allergies, socioeconomic status or home environment), and unestablished temporality. We conclude that the epidemiology literature is limited by high heterogeneity and low study quality and, therefore, it does not provide sufficient evidence regarding causal relationships between gas cooking or indoor NO<sub>2</sub> and asthma or wheeze. We caution against over-interpreting the quantitative evidence synthesis estimates from meta-analyses of these studies.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36311,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Epidemiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/1f/6e/main.PMC10446006.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Epidemiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259011332300010X\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259011332300010X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Lin等人[93]于2013年对儿童燃气烹饪和呼吸系统结果进行了最新的荟萃分析。从那时起,已经发表了许多关于这一主题的流行病学研究。我们对这篇流行病学文献进行了首次系统综述,包括对研究异质性和研究质量的深入评估,这两项都没有在早期综述中进行系统评估。我们共回顾了66项相关研究,包括Lin等人[93]的荟萃分析。大多数研究都是经过设计的横断面研究,排除了因果推断。只有少数是能够建立时间性的队列研究,他们在很大程度上报告了无效的结果。在研究区域、儿童年龄、燃气烹饪暴露定义和哮喘或喘息结果定义方面,各研究存在很大的可变性,排除了对荟萃分析估计的明确解释,如Lin等人[93]中报道的。此外,我们的系统研究质量评估显示,迄今为止,很大一部分研究存在多种偏差和不准确来源,主要是由于自我报告的燃气烹饪暴露或呼吸系统结果,对关键混杂因素(如环境烟草烟雾、哮喘或过敏家族史、社会经济地位或家庭环境)的调整不足,和不稳定的时间性。我们的结论是,流行病学文献受到高度异质性和低研究质量的限制,因此,它没有提供足够的证据来证明燃气烹饪或室内NO2与哮喘或喘息之间的因果关系。我们警告不要过度解读这些研究的荟萃分析中的定量证据综合估计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Gas cooking and respiratory outcomes in children: A systematic review

The most recent meta-analysis of gas cooking and respiratory outcomes in children was conducted by Lin et al. [93] in 2013. Since then, a number of epidemiology studies have been published on this topic. We conducted the first systematic review of this epidemiology literature that includes an in-depth evaluation of study heterogeneity and study quality, neither of which was systematically evaluated in earlier reviews. We reviewed a total of 66 relevant studies, including those in the Lin et al. [93] meta-analysis. Most of the studies are cross-sectional by design, precluding causal inference. Only a few are cohort studies that could establish temporality and they have largely reported null results. There is large variability across studies in terms of study region, age of children, gas cooking exposure definition, and asthma or wheeze outcome definition, precluding clear interpretations of meta-analysis estimates such as those reported in Lin et al. [93]. Further, our systematic study quality evaluation reveals that a large proportion of the studies to date are subject to multiple sources of bias and inaccuracy, primarily due to self-reported gas cooking exposure or respiratory outcomes, insufficient adjustment for key confounders (e.g., environmental tobacco smoke, family history of asthma or allergies, socioeconomic status or home environment), and unestablished temporality. We conclude that the epidemiology literature is limited by high heterogeneity and low study quality and, therefore, it does not provide sufficient evidence regarding causal relationships between gas cooking or indoor NO2 and asthma or wheeze. We caution against over-interpreting the quantitative evidence synthesis estimates from meta-analyses of these studies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Global Epidemiology
Global Epidemiology Medicine-Infectious Diseases
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
39 days
期刊最新文献
A note on handling conditional missing values Tailored guidance to apply the Estimand framework to Trials within Cohorts (TwiCs) studies Improving the timeliness of birth registration in Fiji through a financial incentive Predicting adolescent psychopathology from early life factors: A machine learning tutorial Challenging unverified assumptions in causal claims: Do gas stoves increase risk of pediatric asthma?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1