Abstract
Traffic is one of the major contributors to PM2.5 in cities worldwide. Quantifying the role of traffic is an important step towards understanding the impact of transport policies on the possibilities to achieve cleaner air and accompanying health benefits. We carried out a meta-analysis using the World Health Organisation (WHO) database of source apportionment studies of PM2.5 concentrations. Specifically, we used a Bayesian meta-regression approach, modelling both overall and traffic-related (tailpipe and non-tailpipe) concentrations simultaneously. We obtained the distributions of expected PM2.5 concentrations (posterior densities) of different types for 117 cities worldwide. For each city, we calculated the probabilities of exceeding the WHO-recommended concentration of PM2.5 if all of traffic emissions were removed. Using the non-linear Integrated Exposure Response (IER) function of PM2.5, we estimated percent reduction in different disease endpoints for a scenario with complete removal of traffic emissions. We found that this results in achieving the WHO-recommended concentration of PM2.5 only for a handful of cities that already have low concentrations of pollution. The percentage reduction in prevented mortality for cardiovascular and respiratory diseases increases up to a point (30-40 ug/m3), and above this concentration, it flattens off. For Diabetes-related mortality, the percentage reduction in mortality decreases with increasing concentrations—a trend that is opposite to other outcomes. For cities with high concentrations of pollution, the results highlight the need for multi-sectoral strategies to reduce pollution. The IER functions of PM2.5 result in diminishing returns of health benefits at high concentrations, and in case of Diabetes, there are even negative returns. The results show the significant effect of the shape of IER functions on health benefits. Overall, despite the diminishing results, a significant burden of deaths can be prevented by policies that aim to reduce traffic emissions even at high concentrations of pollution.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding was received.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This research did not require ethics approval.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data can be obtained from the following link
http://www.who.int/quantifying_ehimpacts/global/source_apport/
