测量热暴露与健康结果之间关联的方法:全球综合范围审查

IF 4.3 2区 医学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Geohealth Pub Date : 2024-09-26 DOI:10.1029/2024GH001071
Peter M. Graffy, Ashwin Sunderraj, Maxime A. Visa, Corinne H. Miller, Benjamin W. Barrett, Sheetal Rao, Sara F. Camilleri, Ryan D. Harp, Chuxuan Li, Anne Brenneman, Jennifer Chan, Abel Kho, Norrina Allen, Daniel E. Horton
{"title":"测量热暴露与健康结果之间关联的方法:全球综合范围审查","authors":"Peter M. Graffy,&nbsp;Ashwin Sunderraj,&nbsp;Maxime A. Visa,&nbsp;Corinne H. Miller,&nbsp;Benjamin W. Barrett,&nbsp;Sheetal Rao,&nbsp;Sara F. Camilleri,&nbsp;Ryan D. Harp,&nbsp;Chuxuan Li,&nbsp;Anne Brenneman,&nbsp;Jennifer Chan,&nbsp;Abel Kho,&nbsp;Norrina Allen,&nbsp;Daniel E. Horton","doi":"10.1029/2024GH001071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Objective: To synthesize the methodologies of studies that evaluate the impacts of heat exposure on morbidity and mortality. Methods: Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from date of inception until 1 March 2023 for English language literature on heat exposure and health outcomes. Records were collated, deduplicated and screened, and full texts were reviewed for inclusion and data abstraction. Eligibility for inclusion was determined as any article with climate-related heat exposure and an associated morbidity/mortality outcome. Results: Of 13,136 records initially identified, 237 articles were selected for analysis. The scope of research represented 43 countries, with most studies conducted in China (62), the USA (44), and Australia (16). Across all studies, there were 141 unique climate data sources, no standard threshold for extreme heat, and 200 unique health outcome data sources. The distributed lag non-linear model (DLNM) was the most common analytic method (48.1% of studies) and had high usage rates in China (68.9%) and the USA (31.8%); Australia frequently used conditional logistic regression (50%). Conditional logistic regression was most prevalent in case-control studies (5 of 8 studies, 62.5%) and in case-crossover studies (29 of 70, 41.4%). DLNMs were most common in time series studies (64 of 111, 57.7%) and ecological studies (13 of 20, 65.0%). Conclusions: This review underscores the heterogeneity of methods in heat impact studies across diverse settings and provides a resource for future researchers. Underrepresentation of certain countries, health outcomes, and limited data access were identified as potential barriers.</p>","PeriodicalId":48618,"journal":{"name":"Geohealth","volume":"8 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2024GH001071","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Methodological Approaches for Measuring the Association Between Heat Exposure and Health Outcomes: A Comprehensive Global Scoping Review\",\"authors\":\"Peter M. Graffy,&nbsp;Ashwin Sunderraj,&nbsp;Maxime A. Visa,&nbsp;Corinne H. Miller,&nbsp;Benjamin W. Barrett,&nbsp;Sheetal Rao,&nbsp;Sara F. Camilleri,&nbsp;Ryan D. Harp,&nbsp;Chuxuan Li,&nbsp;Anne Brenneman,&nbsp;Jennifer Chan,&nbsp;Abel Kho,&nbsp;Norrina Allen,&nbsp;Daniel E. Horton\",\"doi\":\"10.1029/2024GH001071\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Objective: To synthesize the methodologies of studies that evaluate the impacts of heat exposure on morbidity and mortality. Methods: Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from date of inception until 1 March 2023 for English language literature on heat exposure and health outcomes. Records were collated, deduplicated and screened, and full texts were reviewed for inclusion and data abstraction. Eligibility for inclusion was determined as any article with climate-related heat exposure and an associated morbidity/mortality outcome. Results: Of 13,136 records initially identified, 237 articles were selected for analysis. The scope of research represented 43 countries, with most studies conducted in China (62), the USA (44), and Australia (16). Across all studies, there were 141 unique climate data sources, no standard threshold for extreme heat, and 200 unique health outcome data sources. The distributed lag non-linear model (DLNM) was the most common analytic method (48.1% of studies) and had high usage rates in China (68.9%) and the USA (31.8%); Australia frequently used conditional logistic regression (50%). Conditional logistic regression was most prevalent in case-control studies (5 of 8 studies, 62.5%) and in case-crossover studies (29 of 70, 41.4%). DLNMs were most common in time series studies (64 of 111, 57.7%) and ecological studies (13 of 20, 65.0%). Conclusions: This review underscores the heterogeneity of methods in heat impact studies across diverse settings and provides a resource for future researchers. Underrepresentation of certain countries, health outcomes, and limited data access were identified as potential barriers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48618,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Geohealth\",\"volume\":\"8 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2024GH001071\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Geohealth\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GH001071\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geohealth","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024GH001071","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:综合评估高温暴露对发病率和死亡率影响的研究方法。方法:在 Embase、MEDLINE、Web of Science 和 Scopus 中检索了自开始之日起至 2023 年 3 月 1 日有关高温暴露和健康后果的英文文献。对记录进行了整理、重复和筛选,并对全文进行了审查,以确定是否纳入并摘录数据。凡是与气候相关的热暴露和相关发病率/死亡率结果的文章均符合纳入资格。结果:在初步确定的 13,136 条记录中,有 237 篇文章被选中进行分析。研究范围涉及 43 个国家,其中大部分研究在中国(62 项)、美国(44 项)和澳大利亚(16 项)进行。在所有研究中,有 141 个独特的气候数据源,没有极端高温的标准阈值,以及 200 个独特的健康结果数据源。分布式滞后非线性模型(DLNM)是最常见的分析方法(占研究的 48.1%),在中国(68.9%)和美国(31.8%)的使用率较高;澳大利亚经常使用条件逻辑回归(50%)。条件逻辑回归在病例对照研究(8 项研究中的 5 项,62.5%)和病例交叉研究(70 项研究中的 29 项,41.4%)中最为普遍。时间序列研究(111 项研究中的 64 项,57.7%)和生态研究(20 项研究中的 13 项,65.0%)中 DLNMs 最为常见。结论:本综述强调了不同环境下热影响研究方法的异质性,并为未来的研究人员提供了资源。某些国家代表性不足、健康结果和数据获取受限被认为是潜在的障碍。
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
Methodological Approaches for Measuring the Association Between Heat Exposure and Health Outcomes: A Comprehensive Global Scoping Review

Objective: To synthesize the methodologies of studies that evaluate the impacts of heat exposure on morbidity and mortality. Methods: Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from date of inception until 1 March 2023 for English language literature on heat exposure and health outcomes. Records were collated, deduplicated and screened, and full texts were reviewed for inclusion and data abstraction. Eligibility for inclusion was determined as any article with climate-related heat exposure and an associated morbidity/mortality outcome. Results: Of 13,136 records initially identified, 237 articles were selected for analysis. The scope of research represented 43 countries, with most studies conducted in China (62), the USA (44), and Australia (16). Across all studies, there were 141 unique climate data sources, no standard threshold for extreme heat, and 200 unique health outcome data sources. The distributed lag non-linear model (DLNM) was the most common analytic method (48.1% of studies) and had high usage rates in China (68.9%) and the USA (31.8%); Australia frequently used conditional logistic regression (50%). Conditional logistic regression was most prevalent in case-control studies (5 of 8 studies, 62.5%) and in case-crossover studies (29 of 70, 41.4%). DLNMs were most common in time series studies (64 of 111, 57.7%) and ecological studies (13 of 20, 65.0%). Conclusions: This review underscores the heterogeneity of methods in heat impact studies across diverse settings and provides a resource for future researchers. Underrepresentation of certain countries, health outcomes, and limited data access were identified as potential barriers.

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
Geohealth
Geohealth Environmental Science-Pollution
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
6.20%
发文量
124
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: GeoHealth will publish original research, reviews, policy discussions, and commentaries that cover the growing science on the interface among the Earth, atmospheric, oceans and environmental sciences, ecology, and the agricultural and health sciences. The journal will cover a wide variety of global and local issues including the impacts of climate change on human, agricultural, and ecosystem health, air and water pollution, environmental persistence of herbicides and pesticides, radiation and health, geomedicine, and the health effects of disasters. Many of these topics and others are of critical importance in the developing world and all require bringing together leading research across multiple disciplines.
期刊最新文献
Planetary Health Booms: Unpacking the Surge in Research Across the Globe Through Joint-Point Analysis Satellite-Derived, Smartphone-Delivered Geospatial Cholera Risk Information for Vulnerable Populations Upstream Oil and Gas Production and Community COVID-19 Case and Mortality Rates in California, USA Association of Long-Term Exposure to PM2.5 Constituents and Green Space With Arthritis and Rheumatoid Arthritis Methods for Quantifying Source-Specific Air Pollution Exposure to Serve Epidemiology, Risk Assessment, and Environmental Justice
×
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