| Literature DB >> 25503413 |
Jinghong Gao1, Yunzong Sun2, Yaogui Lu1, Liping Li1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Changes in relative humidity, along with other meteorological factors, accompany ongoing climate change and play a significant role in weather-related health outcomes, particularly among children. The purpose of this review is to improve our understanding of the relationship between ambient humidity and child health, and to propose directions for future research.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25503413 PMCID: PMC4264743 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0112508
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Adapted STROBE Statement—checklist of items that should be included in reports of observational studies (including additions/adaptations for accommodating meteorological data).
| Item No | Recommendation | |
|
| 1 | ( |
| ( | ||
| and what was found | ||
|
| ||
| Background | 2 | Explain the scientific background and rationale for the investigation being reported |
| Objectives | 3 | State specific objectives, including any pre-specified hypotheses |
|
| ||
| Study design | 4 | Present key elements of study design early in the paper |
| Setting | 5 | Describe the setting, locations, and relevant dates, including periods of recruitment, |
| exposure, follow-up, and data collection | ||
| Participants | 6 | ( |
| selection of participants. Describe methods of follow-up | ||
|
| ||
| ascertainment and control selection. Give the rationale for the choice of cases and | ||
| controls | ||
|
| ||
| selection of participants | ||
| (b) | ||
| exposed and unexposed | ||
|
| ||
| controls per case | ||
| Variables | 7 | Clearly define all meteorological variables, outcomes, exposures, predictors, potential |
| confounders, and effect modifiers. Give diagnostic criteria, if applicable | ||
| Data sources | 8 | For each variable of interest, especially meteorological and outcome variables, give |
| sources of data and details of methods of assessment (measurement). Describe | ||
| comparability of assessment methods if there is more than one group | ||
| Bias | 9 | Describe any efforts to address potential sources of bias |
| Study size | 10 | Explain how the study size was arrived at |
| Quantitative variables | 11 | Explain how quantitative meteorological and outcome variables were handled in |
| the analyses, including how meteorological variables were handled before using for | ||
| analysis, and what kind of statistical software(s), as well as its/their version number | ||
| were used to complete related statistical analysis. If applicable, describe which | ||
| groupings were chosen and why | ||
| Statistical methods | 12 | ( |
| ( | ||
| and interactions | ||
| ( | ||
| (d) | ||
|
| ||
|
| ||
| the sampling strategy | ||
| (e) Describe any sensitivity analyses | ||
|
| ||
| Participants | 13 | (a) Report numbers of individuals at each stage of the study—e.g. numbers potentially |
| eligible, examined for eligibility, confirmed eligible, included in the study, completing | ||
| follow-up, and analysed | ||
| (b) Give reasons for non-participation at each stage | ||
| (c) Consider use of a flow diagram | ||
| Descriptive data | 14 | (a) Give characteristics of study participants (e.g. demographic, clinical, social) and |
| information on exposures and potential confounders. Summarize meteorological | ||
| characteristics of the study area (if applicable) | ||
| (b) Indicate the number of participants with missing data for each variable of interest, | ||
| especially meteorological and outcome variables | ||
| (c) | ||
| Outcome data | 15 |
|
|
| ||
| measures of exposure | ||
|
| ||
| Main results | 16 | ( |
| their precision (e.g. 95% confidence interval). Make clear which confounders were | ||
| adjusted for and why they were included | ||
| (b) Report category boundaries when meteorological or continuous variables were | ||
| categorized | ||
| (c) If relevant, consider translating estimates of relative risk into absolute risk for a | ||
| meaningful time period | ||
| Other analyses | 17 | Report other analyses done—e.g. correlation analysis, analyses of subgroups and |
| interactions, and sensitivity analyses | ||
|
| ||
| Key results | 18 | Summarise key results with reference to study objectives |
| Limitations | 19 | Discuss limitations of the study, taking into account sources of potential bias or |
| imprecision. Discuss both direction and magnitude of any potential bias | ||
| Interpretation | 20 | Give a cautious overall interpretation of results considering objectives, limitations, |
| multiplicity of analyses, results from similar studies, and other relevant evidence | ||
| Generalizability | 21 | Discuss the generalizability (external validity) of the study results |
|
| ||
| Funding | 22 | Give the source of funding and the role of the funders for the present study and, if |
| applicable, for the original study on which the present article is based |
*Give information separately for cases and controls in case-control studies and, if applicable, for exposed and unexposed groups in cohort and cross-sectional studies.
Figure 1Flow chart of the screening and selection process of the study articles.
Characteristics of included studies about ambient humidity and children's health (n = 37).
| Author(year) | Study region | Target population | Study design and | Humidity | Target outcome | Statistical indicator | Adjustment for | Reporting |
| and period | (number, age) | analysis method | exposure | and effect estimate | confounding | quality(% | ||
| variable | factors | score) | ||||||
| YÜKSEL et al. | Izmir, Turkey | 21 children | Descriptive study, | Daily | Total daily | r = 0.578 | No adjustments | 53.33 |
| 1993–1994 | aged 5–14 | Correlation and | relative | complaints of the |
| were conducted | ||
| years | variance analysis | humidity | asthma patient | |||||
| Guo et al. | Taiwan | 331,686 | Descriptive study, | Daily | Asthma | Boys: R2 = 0.57, β = 0.37 | Adjusted for age, | 64.29 |
| 1995–1996 | children aged | Logistic regression | winter | prevalence rate | (95% CI: 0.0078–0.73, | history of atopic | ||
| 0–15 years | analysis | month |
| eczema and parental | ||||
| humidity | education | |||||||
| Checkley et al. | Lima, Peru, | 57 331 children | Time-series study, | Daily mean | Daily hospital | RR = 0.97 | No adjustments | 71.43 |
| 1993–1998 | under 10 years | Poisson GAM | relative | admissions for | (95% CI: 0.97–0.98) | were conducted | ||
| humidity | diarrheal diseases | |||||||
| per 1% increase in | ||||||||
| relative humidity | ||||||||
| at 37 lag days | ||||||||
| Weiland et al. | Western | Children aged | Multilevel linear | Monthly mean | Prevalence rates | 1) 13–14 years old children : | Adjusted for gross | 60.00 |
| Europe | 6–7 and 13–14 | regression | lowest relative | of symptoms of | β = 0.13 (95% CI:0.04–0.23) | national product per | ||
| 1992–1996 | years | analyses | humidity | asthma | 2) 6–7 years old children : | capita (GNP) | ||
| β = 0.09 (95% CI:0.02–0.15) | ||||||||
| Hashimoto et al. | Tokyo, Japan | 5559 children | Multiple logistic | Daily mean | Number of emergent | β = 0.075, | Adjusting for | 74.07 |
| 1998–2002 | aged 2–15 years | regression analyses | relative | visits for childhood | (95% CI: 0.06–009, | calendar month and | ||
| humidity | asthma |
| day of the week | |||||
| Viegas et al. | Buenos Aires, | 18561 children | Spearman's rank | Monthly mean | Respiratory viruses | 1) RSV: r = 0.6, | No adjustments | 62.96 |
| Argentina | aged under 5 | correlation test | relative | frequencies among | 2) IA: r = 0.47, | were conducted | ||
| 1998–2002 | years | humidity | the patients | |||||
| Lapeña et al. | Leon, Spain. | 167 children | Case-control study, | Weekly | Admission with lower | 1) r = −0.15, | No adjustments | 72.41 |
| 1995–2000 | aged under 2 | Correlation analysis | relative | respiratory tract | 2) OR = 0.96 CI: 0.92–0.99) | were conducted | ||
| years | Multivariate logistic | humidity | infection due to RSV |
| ||||
| regression model | was not included in the model) | |||||||
| Priftis et al. | Athens, | 18950 children | Multiple regression | Monthly mean | Monthly hospital | β = 1.106, | No adjustments | 75.86 |
| Greece | aged 0–4 years | analysis | relative | admission rates for | r2 = 0.592 | were conducted | ||
| 1978–2000 | humidity | childhood asthma | ||||||
| Al-Toum et al. | Amman, | 200 Children | Descriptive study, | Monthly mean | Prevalence of RSV | r = 0.66, | No adjustments | 62.96 |
| Jordan | aged under 2 | Correlation analysis | relative | were conducted | ||||
| 2002–2004 | years | humidity | ||||||
| Xirasagar et al. | Taiwan | 27275 Children | Cross-sectional study, | Monthly mean | Monthly asthma | 1) Children aged 2–5 years: | Seasonality trend | 70.97 |
| 1998–2001 | aged 0–14 years | ARIMA models, | relative | admission rates | r = −0.290, | was evaluated | ||
| Spearman rank | humidity | 2) Children aged 6–14 years: | ||||||
| correlations analysis | r = −0.415, | |||||||
| Yé et al. | Kossi, | 676 children | Descriptive study, | Daily mean | Incidence of clinical | β = −23.2151 | Site of the study, | 75.86 |
| Burkina Faso | aged 6–59 | Logistic regression | relative | malaria | (95% CI: −36.7151 to | sex; age; presence | ||
| 2003–2004 | months | humidity | −9.7152) | of animal were | ||||
| considered | ||||||||
| Kurt et al. | Turkey | 25843 children | Cross-sectional | Yearly mean | Allergic diseases | 1) Asthma: OR = 1.009 | Adjusted for age, | 78.57 |
| 2004 | aged 6–15 years | study, and | relative | (95% CI: 1.002–1.015) | rural/urban sex, | |||
| Multivariate logistic | humidity | 2) Wheezing: OR = 1.01 | residence and | |||||
| regression analysis | >70% | (95% CI: 1.003–1.02) | sibling number | |||||
| 3) Allergic rhinitis: OR = | ||||||||
| 1.006 (95% CI: 1.001–1.01) | ||||||||
| D'Souza et al. | 3 Australian | Children aged | Time–series study | Weekly mean | Weekly admissions | 1) Canberra: IRR = 0.98 | Adjusted for trend, | 76.00 |
| cities | 0–5 years | and log-linear | relative | for rotavirus diarrheal | (95% CI: 0.97–0.99) | season and previous | ||
| 1993–2003 | regression model | humidity | per 1% increase in | 2) Brisbane: IRR = 0.98 | 2 weeks' admission | |||
| relative humidity | (95% CI: 0.97–0.99) | |||||||
| of the previous week | 3) Melbourne: IRR = 0.99 | |||||||
| (95% CI: 0.99–1.00) | ||||||||
| Omer et al. | Lombok | 2878 children | Negative binomial | Daily mean | Daily number of | IRR = 1.06 , | No adjustments | 85.71 |
| island, | aged 0–2 years | regression and | relative | RSV cases 8 days | (95% CI: 1.03–1.10) | were conducted | ||
| Indonesia | multivariate | humidity | later | |||||
| 2000–2002 | regression | |||||||
| Noyola. D. E. and Mandeville, P. B | San Luis | 1393 children | Regression | Weekly mean | Weekly number | β = 0.035, | Temperature, hours | 61.29 |
| Potosí, | aged 0–18 | analysis | relative | of RSV cases | (95% CI: 0.012–0.058) | light and precipitation | ||
| Mexico. | years | humidity at | were considered | |||||
| 2002–2006 | 08:00 hours | in the model | ||||||
| Nastos et al. | Athens, | Children aged | Poisson GLM | Monthly mean | Monthly number of | β = 0.0273, | No adjustments | 76.92 |
| Greece | 0–4 years | relative | childhood asthma | ( 95% CI: 0.0264–0.0282) | were conducted | |||
| 1978–2000 | humidity | admissions(CAA) | ||||||
| Lee et al. | Taiwan | 317,926 | Cross-sectional | Monthly mean | Prevalence of | 1)Boys: RR = 1.15, | Adjusted for age, | 78.13 |
| 1995–1996 | children aged | study and Logistic | lowest relative | flexural eczema | ( 95% CI: 1.04–1.27) | parental education | ||
| mostly | regression | humidity | 2)Girls: RR = 1.22, | level, asthma and | ||||
| between 12–14 | (95% CI: 1.08–1.38) | active smoking habit | ||||||
| du Prel et al. | Mainz, | 3044 children | Multiple time | Mean | Hospitalization | Human rhinovirus : | Correlations among | 77.78 |
| Germany | aged 0–16 years | series analysis | relative | frequency due to | β = 0.218, | meteorological | ||
| 2001–2006 | humidity | acute respiratory tract | parameters were | |||||
| infections (ARI) | controlled for | |||||||
| Murdoch and Jennings (2009) | Christchurch, | Children aged | Ecological study, | Monthly | Incidence rates of | IRR = 1.87, | No adjustments | 80.77 |
| New Zealand | <5 years | Negative binomial | occurrence of | invasive pneumococcal | (95% CI: 1.02–3.45) | were conducted | ||
| 1995–2006 | regression analysis | daily mean 9am | disease(IPD) for the | |||||
| humidity>75% | 1-month lag | |||||||
| Mireku et al. | Detroit, | 25,401 children | Time–series study, | Intraday | The counts of | β = 0.10, | Adjusted for | 73.08 |
| America | aged 1–18 years | Generalized | humidity | asthma admissions | seasonality, air | |||
| 2004–2005 | additive model | change | 1-day later | pollution, and | ||||
| (GAM) | aeroallergen exposure | |||||||
| Charland K. M. et al. | 37 paediatric | 63,334 children | Bayesian | Daily mean | The peak week | β = −0.085, | Population type, | 74.19 |
| hospitals in | aged 0–18 years | hierarchical | dew point | of influenza visits | (95% CI: −0.20 to 0.031) | latitude, longitude, | ||
| USA | models | solar radiation and | ||||||
| 2000–2005 | temperature | |||||||
| were considered | ||||||||
| García-Marcos et al. (2009) | Coastal areas, | Children aged | Poisson regression | Annually | Adjusted prevalence | 1) 6–7 years old: PR = 1.28 | No adjustments | 81.48 |
| Spain | 6–7 years and | model | mean | ratios (PR) of current | ( 95% CI: 1.12–1.46) | were conducted | ||
| 1994–2002 | 13–14 years | relative | wheeze per 10% | 2) 13–14 years old: PR = 1.25 | ||||
| humidity | increase in humidity | ( 95% CI: 1.13–1.39) | ||||||
| Connelly et al. | Kansas, | 25 children | Multilevel model | Daily thrice | Probability of | β = 0.02, | Controlling for | 74.07 |
| America | aged 8–17 years | analyses | relative | headache occurrence | OR = 1.02 | changes in the child's | ||
| 2007–2008 | humidity | negative affect | ||||||
| Chou et al. | Taiwan | 290331 children | Time-series | Monthly mean | Monthly morbidity | β = −0.033, | Adjusted for | 84.62 |
| 1996–2007 | aged 0–14 years | study, Poisson | relative | of diarrhea (no lag) | seasonality, long-term | |||
| regression | humidity | trends, lag effects | ||||||
| and autocorrelation | ||||||||
| Tchidjou et al. | Yaoundé , | 1306 children | Negative | Daily | Frequency of | RR = 1.22 | Adjusted for | 80.00 |
| Cameroon | aged 0–18 years | binomial | relative | hospitalization for acute | (95% CI: 1.07–1.40) | seasonality and | ||
| 2006–2007 | regressions | humidity | respiratory infections | annual trend | ||||
| Nascimento-Carvalho et al. | Salvador, | 184 children | Correlation | Monthly mean | Infections caused by | 1) Overall viral infections: | No adjustments | 72.00 |
| Brazil | aged 0–5 years | analysis | relative | different aetiological | r = 0.6, | were conducted | ||
| 2003–2005 | humidity | agents | 2) Chlamydia trachomatis: | |||||
| r = −0.5, | ||||||||
| Konstantinou et al. | Norwich, UK; | 56624 children | Poisson | Monthly mean | Monthly incidence | 1) Norwich: IRR = 0.972 | Adjusted for | 69.23 |
| Heraklion, | aged 0–14 years | regression model | relative | rate of acute | (95% CI: 0.959–0.985) | seasonal effect | ||
| Greece | humidity | urticarial | 2) Heraklion: IRR = 1.035 | |||||
| 2005–2007 | (95% CI: 1.015–1.056) | |||||||
| Zacarias, Majlender | Maputo, | 60943 infants | Bayesian | Monthly mean | Malaria incidence | RR = 0.049 | The spatial and | 73.08 |
| Mozambique | aged 0–4 years | hierarchical | relative | (95%CI: 0.03048- | temporal correlations | |||
| 2007–2008 | models | humidity | 0.06531) | were considered | ||||
| Loh et al. | Singapore | 42155 children | Time–series | Weekly | Admissions due to | 1) URTI: β = −0.228, | Select model with | 84.00 |
| 2003–2008 | almost aged 0–5 | study, and | relative | upper and lower |
| the lowest Akaike's | ||
| years | ARIMA model | humidity | respiratory tract | 2) LRTI: β = −0.760, | Information Criterion | |||
| infection ( URTI |
| |||||||
| and LRTI) | ||||||||
| Onozuka, Hashizume | Fukuoka, | 67000 children | Time–series study, | Weekly mean | Weekly number of | Percentage increase: | Adjusting for | 88.46 |
| Japan | aged<15 years | Negative binomial | relative | mumps cases per 1% | 1.4% (95% CI: 0.5–2.4) | temporal, seasonal and | ||
| 2000–2008 | regression | humidity | increase in humidity | inter-annual variations, | ||||
| for 0–2 weeks lag | and temperature | |||||||
| Arnedo Pena et al. | Spain | 24301 children | Logistic regression, | Annually | Prevalence rate | β = −0.00334, | Prevalence rate of | 85.19 |
| 1971–2005 | aged 13–14 | Multiple regression | mean relative | of asthma |
| asthma and collinearity | ||
| years | models | humidity | were adjusted | |||||
| Onozuka, Hashizume | Fukuoka, | 61736 children | Time-series study, | Weekly mean | Percentage increase in | Percent change: 4.7% | Adjusting for seasonal, | 85.71 |
| Japan | aged 0–4 years | Negative binomial | relative | number of hand, foot, | (95% CI: 2.3–7.1) | long-term trends, and | ||
| 2000–2010 | regression | humidity | and mouth disease per | inter-annual variations | ||||
| 1% increase in humidity | ||||||||
| with 0–3 weeks lag | ||||||||
| Onozuka, Hashizume | Fukuoka, | 423142 children | Time-series study, | Weekly mean | Percentage increase in | Percent change: 3.9% | Adjusting for seasonal, | 88.89 |
| Japan | aged<15 years | Negative binomial | relative | number of infectious | (95% CI: 2.8–5.0) | inter-annual, and | ||
| 2000–2008 | regression | humidity | gastroenteritis per 1% | temperature variations | ||||
| decrease in humidity | ||||||||
| for lags of 0–6 weeks | ||||||||
| Wang et al. | 15 states | 1459 children | Multivariable | Daily mean | Hospital admission | OR = 0.9 , | Adjusting for pressure | 76.67 |
| in USA | <2 years of age | logistic regression | dew point | (95% CI: 0.8–0.996 ) | altitude, wind speed, | |||
| 2004–2006 | and temperature | |||||||
| Khor et al. | Kuala | 10269 children | Multiple | Monthly mean | Monthly number of | β = −1.070, | No adjustments | 74.07 |
| Lumpur, | aged 0–5 years | regression | relative | respiratory syncytial |
| were conducted | ||
| Malaysia | analysis | humidity | virus (RSV) cases | |||||
| 1982–2008 | ||||||||
| Chang et al. | Taiwan | 1914 children | Case-crossover | Daily mean | Incidence of | IRR = 1.08, | Adjusted for seasonal, | 68.97 |
| 1998–2008 | aged<15 years | study, and | relative | Enterovirus 71 | (95% CI: 1.05–1.10) | temporal trends and | ||
| Logistic regression | humidity | infections | annual variations | |||||
| Turkish Neonatal | Turkey | 3464 children | Correlation analysis | Monthly mean | Hospitalization with | r = 0.627, | Trends and seasonality | 73.08 |
| 2008–2010 | aged<2 years | and Spearman | relative | respiratory syncytial | were described | |||
| correlation test | humidity | virus infection |
Abbreviations: GAM, generalized additive model; GLM, generalized linear models; ARIMA models, autoregressive integrated moving average modeling; r, correlation coefficient; β, regression coefficient; R2/r2, coefficient of determination; RR, relative risk; OR, odds ratio; IRR, incident rate ratio; CI, 95% confidence interval; RSV, human respiratory syncytial virus; IA, influenza virus A.
These included articles are ordered by the date of publication and the first word of their titles.
In these studies there is more than one meteorological factor that was investigated and analyzed, respectively or simultaneously.
[N]: N is the specific citation number of the related study included in the present review.