Min Du1, Liyuan Tao2, Lin Zhu3, Jue Liu4. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, No.38, Xueyuan Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100191, China. 2. Research Center of Clinical Epidemiology, Peking University Third Hospital, No.49 Huayuan North Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100083, China. 3. Center for Primary Care & Outcomes Research, School of Medicine, Center for Health Policy, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford University, 450 Jane Stanford Way, Stanford, CA, 94305-2004, USA. 4. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, No.38, Xueyuan Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100191, China. jueliu@bjmu.edu.cn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cohort studies on the impact of biomass fuel use for cooking on cognitive impairment among older population are still lacking in China and elsewhere. The aim of this study was to examine whether biomass fuel use for cooking is associated with cognitive impairment in Chinese adults aged 65 years or older. METHODS: The prospective population-based cohort study of the Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey (CLHLS) included participants aged 65 years or older in 2014 who were followed-up until 2018 in 23 provinces in China. The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) was used to assess cognitive function, and cognitive impairment was defined as total MMSE scores less than 18. The association between biomass fuel use and cognitive impairment was evaluated using the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Of the 4145 participants included at baseline, participants who reported that they used biomass fuel for cooking (40.43%; IR: 3.11 versus 2.77 per 100 person-years; aHR: 1.27, 95% CI: 1.02-1.58) had a higher risk of cognitive impairment compared with participants who used clean fuels (53.75%). A stratified analyses showed greater effect estimates of cognitive impairment in the older people that lived in the rural areas (aHR: 1.444, 95% CI: 1.08-3.90) and never smoked (aHR: 1.33, 95% CI: 1.04-1.71). CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrated that biomass fuel used for cooking was associated with cognitive impairment, as defined by MMSE, in a population-based study of elderly in China. To prevent cognitive impairment, the structure of cooking fuels requires improvements.
BACKGROUND: Cohort studies on the impact of biomass fuel use for cooking on cognitive impairment among older population are still lacking in China and elsewhere. The aim of this study was to examine whether biomass fuel use for cooking is associated with cognitive impairment in Chinese adults aged 65 years or older. METHODS: The prospective population-based cohort study of the Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey (CLHLS) included participants aged 65 years or older in 2014 who were followed-up until 2018 in 23 provinces in China. The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) was used to assess cognitive function, and cognitive impairment was defined as total MMSE scores less than 18. The association between biomass fuel use and cognitive impairment was evaluated using the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Of the 4145 participants included at baseline, participants who reported that they used biomass fuel for cooking (40.43%; IR: 3.11 versus 2.77 per 100 person-years; aHR: 1.27, 95% CI: 1.02-1.58) had a higher risk of cognitive impairment compared with participants who used clean fuels (53.75%). A stratified analyses showed greater effect estimates of cognitive impairment in the older people that lived in the rural areas (aHR: 1.444, 95% CI: 1.08-3.90) and never smoked (aHR: 1.33, 95% CI: 1.04-1.71). CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrated that biomass fuel used for cooking was associated with cognitive impairment, as defined by MMSE, in a population-based study of elderly in China. To prevent cognitive impairment, the structure of cooking fuels requires improvements.
Authors: Malek Bentayeb; Marzia Simoni; Dan Norback; Sandra Baldacci; Sara Maio; Giovanni Viegi; Isabella Annesi-Maesano Journal: J Environ Sci Health A Tox Hazard Subst Environ Eng Date: 2013 Impact factor: 2.269
Authors: Yuan-Ting C Lo; Ya-Chi Lu; Yu-Hung Chang; Senyeong Kao; Han-Bin Huang Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-08-19 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Matthew Shupler; Perry Hystad; Aaron Birch; Daniel Miller-Lionberg; Matthew Jeronimo; Raphael E Arku; Yen Li Chu; Maha Mushtaha; Laura Heenan; Sumathy Rangarajan; Pamela Seron; Fernando Lanas; Fairuz Cazor; Patricio Lopez-Jaramillo; Paul A Camacho; Maritza Perez; Karen Yeates; Nicola West; Tatenda Ncube; Brian Ncube; Jephat Chifamba; Rita Yusuf; Afreen Khan; Bo Hu; Xiaoyun Liu; Li Wei; Lap Ah Tse; Deepa Mohan; Parthiban Kumar; Rajeev Gupta; Indu Mohan; K G Jayachitra; Prem K Mony; Kamala Rammohan; Sanjeev Nair; P V M Lakshmi; Vivek Sagar; Rehman Khawaja; Romaina Iqbal; Khawar Kazmi; Salim Yusuf; Michael Brauer Journal: Lancet Planet Health Date: 2020-10
Authors: Joseph L Saenz; Sara D Adar; Yuan S Zhang; Jenny Wilkens; Aparajita Chattopadhyay; Jinkook Lee; Rebeca Wong Journal: Environ Int Date: 2021-06-26 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Lee Smith; Damiano Pizzol; Guillermo F López Sánchez; Karel Kostev; Hans Oh; Louis Jacob; Nicola Veronese; Benjamin R Underwood; Laurie Butler; Yvonne Barnett; Mark A Tully; Ai Koyanagi Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-08-18 Impact factor: 4.996