Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background Ambient fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) is a major environmental health risk, yet its contribution to sick leave and related productivity losses remains insufficiently quantified. We therefore examined the association between PM 2.5 exposure and all-cause sick leave days and estimated the corresponding model-based burden and productivity losses. Methods Using routine health insurance data from AOK Baden-Württemberg for 2010–2022, we fitted generalized additive models with penalised splines to estimate the exposure–response curve between monthly PM 2.5 exposure and all-cause sick leave days. Models were adjusted for long-term trends, seasonality, temperature, sex, the COVID-19 period, NO 2 , vacation days, and lockdown days, and accounted for spatial heterogeneity using a postal-code-based Markov random field. Model-based exposure contrasts were derived from predicted sick leave days at selected PM 2.5 concentrations. Productivity losses were estimated using the human capital approach. Results PM 2.5 showed a positive non-linear association with sick-leave days (p < 0.001). Compared with 5 µg/m 3 , adjusted predicted sick-leave days were 9.56% higher at 10 µg/m 3 (95% CI 9.09–10.00) and 15.00% higher at 20 µg/m 3 (95% CI 14.20–15.80), while little change was observed between 10 and 15 µg/m 3 (+0.04%, 95% CI − 0.30 to 0.38). The overall non-linear association was supported across additional analyses, although its magnitude and precise shape varied with temporal coverage and covariate adjustment. PM 2.5 concentrations above the WHO guideline of 5 µg/m 3 corresponded to 105 model-attributable excess sick-leave days per 1,000 working-age inhabitants per year, equivalent to approximately 5.31 million excess sick-leave days and €1.56 billion in annual productivity losses in Germany. Conclusion Higher PM 2.5 exposure was associated with a relevant model-attributable burden of sickness absence and productivity losses. These findings suggest that ambient PM 2.5 may be an important population-level correlate of work absence, although causal interpretation is limited by the ecological study design and residual confounding.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aretz et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: