The aim of this study was to review original scientific articles describing the relationship between atmospheric pollution and damage to human health. We also aimed to determine which of these studies mentioned public policy issues. Original articles relating to atmospheric pollution and human health published between 1995 and 2009 were retrieved from the PubMed database and analyzed. This study included only articles dealing with atmospheric pollutants resulting primarily from vehicle emissions. Three researchers were involved in the final selection of the studies, and the chosen articles were approved by at least two of the three researchers. Of the 84 non-Brazilian studies analyzed, 80 showed an association between atmospheric pollution and adverse effects on human health. Moreover, 66 showed evidence of adverse effects on human health, even at levels below the permitted emission standards. Three studies mentioned public policies aimed at changing emission standards. Similarly, the 29 selected Brazilian studies reported adverse associations with human health, and 27 showed evidence of adverse effects even at levels below the legally permitted emission standards. Of these studies, 16 mentioned public policies aimed at changing emission standards. Based on the Brazilian and non-Brazilian scientific studies that have been conducted, it can be concluded that, even under conditions that are compliant with Brazilian air quality standards, the concentration of atmospheric pollutants in Brazil can negatively affect human health. However, as little discussion of this topic has been generated, this finding demonstrates the need to incorporate epidemiological evidence into decisions regarding legal regulations and to discuss the public policy implications in epidemiological studies.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 November 2020.
All research outputs
#1,466,966
of 28,623,232 outputs
Outputs from Clinics
#51
of 1,307 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,974
of 207,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinics
#6
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,623,232 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,307 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 207,938 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
