Ecological evidence links ambient particulate matter ≤2.5 mm (PM2.5) and the rate of COVID-19 infections, severity, and deaths. However, such studies are unable to account for individual-level differences in major confounders like socioeconomic status and often rely on imprecise measures of PM2.5. We conducted a systematic review of case-control and cohort studies, which rely on individual-level data, searching Medline, Embase, and the WHO COVID-19 database 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/trim-and-fill sensitivity analyses to account for publication bias. N = 18 studies met inclusion criteria. A 10 μg/m3 increase in PM2.5 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) odds of severe illness (hospitalisation, ICU admission, or requiring respiratory support) (N = 6). Pooled mortality results (N = 5) indicated increased deaths due to PM2.5 but were 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 socioeconomic status (4/18 studies), instead using area-based indicators (11/18 studies) or no such adjustments (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. There was evidence of publication bias in studies of infection (p = 0.012) but not severity (p = 0.132) or mortality (p = 0.100). While methodological limits and evidence of bias require cautious interpretation of the findings, we found compelling evidence that PM2.5 increases the risk of COVID-19 infection and severe disease, and weaker evidence of an increase in mortality risk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sheppard et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: