2014
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-014-3458-7
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Maternal exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and pregnancy outcomes: a meta-analysis

Abstract: A growing body of evidence has investigated the association between maternal exposure to PM2.5 (particulate matter with aerodynamic diameter 2.5 μm) during pregnancy and adverse pregnancy outcomes. However, the results of those studies are not consistent. To synthetically quantify the relationship between maternal exposure to PM2.5 during pregnancy and pregnancy outcomes (the change in birth weight, low birth weight (LBW), preterm birth (PTB), small for gestational age (SGA), and stillbirth), a meta-analysis o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

3
92
3
3

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 155 publications
(101 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
3
92
3
3
Order By: Relevance
“…For SGA our results are consistent with a recent meta-analysis (Zhu et al, 2015) which found a positive association between SGA and entire pregnancy exposure to particulate matter with Fig. 1.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…For SGA our results are consistent with a recent meta-analysis (Zhu et al, 2015) which found a positive association between SGA and entire pregnancy exposure to particulate matter with Fig. 1.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Just as its small size and long residence time in air, more likely adsorbing various harmful substances in the air, PM 2.5 can enter the depths of human respiratory tract and participate in the blood circulation (Kreyling et al 2002;Billet et al 2007;Zhu et al 2015). The results verified the statement that PM 2.5 tends to be more harmful to human than other air pollutants including PM 10 .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 66%
“…If a study did not show enough quantitative data, we would contact the author by sending an email, and the study would be excluded without getting an answer. To avoid involving the same or overlapping dataset, when the same patient population in a region was included in several publications, only the study with the largest number of observations and/or the longest study period was included in the meta-analysis (Zhu et al 2015). For example, results from Zanobetti and Schwartz (2006) were chosen over Peters et al (2001) in the same region, for the former reporting a longer study period.…”
Section: Study Selection (Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria)mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations