Burden of disease assessments for air pollution and noise: a scoping review of methodological choices and input data

Clicks: 14
ID: 333759
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #134 of 152 articles by views in turkish journal of public health

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 152 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Aim This study aims to assess the variation in methodological choices and input data in burden of disease (BoD) studies addressing air pollution and noise, and whether these choices are adequately reported. Methods We carried out systematic literature searches in the MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, and Web of Science databases. We included studies that estimated BoD attributable to long-term exposure to ambient air pollution and environmental noise. Results In total, 92 studies were included in the scoping review. The majority (75%) assessed BoD attributable to air pollution only, while studies assessing noise or both risk factors were less frequent. Substantial diversity was observed in the choice of input data for exposure assessments, health outcomes, and exposure–response functions as well as in methodological choices of cut-off or counterfactual exposure level, uncertainty assessments, and approach for avoiding double counting of the disease burden. Insufficient reporting was most prevalent regarding cut-off values, choice of life table, and input data for exposure assessments. Conclusions This review revealed considerable variation in methods and input data used in BoD calculations for air pollution and noise, as well as inadequate reporting. Transparent reporting is necessary to ensure the applicability and comparability of BoD estimates, highlighting the need for guidelines for reporting of BoD studies on air pollution and noise.
Reference Key
openalex_W7223453415 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Ingrid Rønning Heyerdahl, Pham Minh Nhat, Liliana Vázquez Fernández, Ricardo Assunção, Nataliya Byelyey, Alberto Castro, Periklis Charalampous, Mariana O. Corda, Vanessa Gorasso, Juanita A. Haagsma, Heli Lehtomäki, Axel Luyten, Carla Martins, Jonas Minet Kinge, Anette Kocbach Bølling, Gunn Marit Aasvang
Are you one of these authors? Claim your profile
Journal turkish journal of public health
Year 2026
DOI
10.1007/s10389-026-02921-x
URL
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-026-02921-x
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.