ReviewParticle and fibre toxicology2024
Controlled human exposures: a review and comparison of the health effects of diesel exhaust and wood smoke.
Review in Particle and fibre toxicology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bronchial mucosal nuclear transcription factor expression and inflammatory response in humans after exposure to wood smoke.Particle and fibre toxicology · 2026Trial
- Climate Change and Respiratory Health: Opportunities to Contribute to Environmental Justice: An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One of the most pressing issues in global health is air pollution. Emissions from traffic-related air pollution and biomass burning are two of the most common sources of air pollution. Diesel exhaust (DE) and wood smoke (WS) have been used as models of these pollutant sources in controlled human exposure (CHE) experiments. The aim of this review was to compare the health effects of DE and WS using results obtained from CHE studies. A total of 119 CHE-DE publications and 25 CHE-WS publications were identified for review. CHE studies of DE generally involved shorter exposure durations and lower particulate matter concentrations, and demonstrated more potent dysfunctional outcomes than CHE studies of WS. In the airways, DE induces neutrophilic inflammation and increases airway hyperresponsiveness, but the effects of WS are unclear. There is strong evidence that DE provokes systemic oxidative stress and inflammation, but less evidence exists for WS. Exposure to DE was more prothrombotic than WS. DE generally increased cardiovascular dysfunction, but limited evidence is available for WS. Substantial heterogeneity in experimental methodology limited the comparison between studies. In many areas, outcomes of WS exposures tended to trend in similar directions to those of DE, suggesting that the effects of DE exposure may be useful for inferring possible responses to WS. However, several gaps in the literature were identified, predominantly pertaining to elucidating the effects of WS exposure. Future studies should strongly consider performing head-to-head comparisons between DE and WS using a CHE design to determine the differential effects of these exposures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.