Public Health Reviews (Jun 2024)

Two Decades of Air Pollution Health Risk Assessment: Insights From the Use of WHO’s AirQ and AirQ+ Tools

  • Heresh Amini,
  • Heresh Amini,
  • Fatemeh Yousefian,
  • Sasan Faridi,
  • Zorana J. Andersen,
  • Ellénore Calas,
  • Alberto Castro,
  • Alberto Castro,
  • Karla Cervantes-Martínez,
  • Thomas Cole-Hunter,
  • Magali Corso,
  • Natasa Dragic,
  • Dimitris Evangelopoulos,
  • Christian Gapp,
  • Mohammad Sadegh Hassanvand,
  • Ingu Kim,
  • Alain Le Tertre,
  • Sylvia Medina,
  • Brian Miller,
  • Stephanie Montero,
  • Weeberb J. Requia,
  • Horacio Riojas-Rodriguez,
  • David Rojas-Rueda,
  • David Rojas-Rueda,
  • Evangelia Samoli,
  • Jose Luis Texcalac-Sangrador,
  • Maayan Yitshak-Sade,
  • Maayan Yitshak-Sade,
  • Joel Schwartz,
  • Nino Kuenzli,
  • Nino Kuenzli,
  • Joseph V. Spadaro,
  • Michal Krzyzanowski,
  • Pierpaolo Mudu

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/phrs.2024.1606969
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 45

Abstract

Read online

ObjectivesWe evaluated studies that used the World Health Organization’s (WHO) AirQ and AirQ+ tools for air pollution (AP) health risk assessment (HRA) and provided best practice suggestions for future assessments.MethodsWe performed a comprehensive review of studies using WHO’s AirQ and AirQ+ tools, searching several databases for relevant articles, reports, and theses from inception to Dec 31, 2022.ResultsWe identified 286 studies that met our criteria. The studies were conducted in 69 countries, with most (57%) in Iran, followed by Italy and India (∼8% each). We found that many studies inadequately report air pollution exposure data, its quality, and validity. The decisions concerning the analysed population size, health outcomes of interest, baseline incidence, concentration-response functions, relative risk values, and counterfactual values are often not justified, sufficiently. Many studies lack an uncertainty assessment.ConclusionOur review found a number of common shortcomings in the published assessments. We suggest better practices and urge future studies to focus on the quality of input data, its reporting, and associated uncertainties.

Keywords