Abstract
Background and objective Ecological studies indicate ambient particulate matter ≤2.5mm (PM2.5) air pollution is associated with poorer COVID-19 outcomes. However, these studies cannot account for individual heterogeneity and often have imprecise estimates of PM2.5 exposure. We review evidence from studies using individual-level data to determine whether PM2.5 increases risk of COVID-19 infection, severe disease, and death.
Methods Systematic review of case-control and cohort studies, searching Medline, Embase, and WHO COVID-19 up to 30 June 2022. Study quality was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results were pooled with a random effects meta-analysis, with Egger’s regression, funnel plots, and leave-one-out and trim-and-fill analyses to adjust for publication bias.
Results N=18 studies met inclusion criteria. A 10μg/m3 increase in PM2.5 exposure was associated with 66% (95% CI: 1.31-2.11) greater odds of COVID-19 infection (N=7) and 127% (95% CI: 1.41-3.66) increase in severe illness (hospitalisation or worse) (N=6). Pooled mortality results (N=5) were positive but non-significant (OR 1.40; 0.94 to 2.10). Most studies were rated “good” quality (14/18 studies), though there were numerous methodological issues; few used individual-level data to adjust for confounders like socioeconomic status (4/18 studies), instead using area-based indicators (12/18 studies) or not adjusting for it (3/18 studies). Most severity (9/10 studies) and mortality studies (5/6 studies) were based on people already diagnosed COVID-19, potentially introducing collider bias.
Conclusion There is strong evidence that ambient PM2.5 increases the risk of COVID-19 infection, and weaker evidence of increases in severe disease and mortality.
Funding This review was completed as a Scholarly Intensive Placement project by NS, which received no funding.
Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests.
Registration This study was registered on PROSPERO on 8 July 2022 (CRD42022345129): https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022345129
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Protocols
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022345129
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
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 is a systematic review and meta-analysis, using only published research results. These may not be widely available to the public due to paywalls.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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
All data and materials are available online on a public repository: https://doi.org/10.26180/21529158.v3
