Trends on PM2.5 research, 1997–2016: a bibliometric study

  • Sheng Yang
  • Jing Sui
  • Tong Liu
  • Wenjuan Wu
  • Siyi Xu
  • Lihong Yin
  • Yuepu Pu
  • Xiaomei Zhang
  • Yan Zhang
  • Bo Shen
  • Geyu Liang
Trend Editorial

Introduction

Particulate matter with the aerodynamic equivalent diameter ≤ 2.5 μm is considered as fine particulate matter (PM2.5) (Callen et al. 2012). Because of its small size, light weight, long-time retention and drift in the atmosphere, it has become the primary pollutant in large cities and has attracted wide attention. PM2.5 has attracted scholars’ wide attention because the massive evidence indicated that PM2.5 had significant impact in many aspects, including air quality (Buczynska et al. 2014; Collins et al. 2014), human health (respiratory system, cardiovascular health) (Weichenthal et al. 2014; Xing et al. 2016), and climate (cloud and rain) (Huo et al. 2009; Lin et al. 2015).

The study interest on PM2.5 has been increasing dramatically recently, and many academic journals have published papers about it. Bibliometric provides a good choice to assess the trend in research activity over time, analyzes the contributions of countries, and institutes journals and scholars (Wang et al. 2016). Presently, there is no study on PM2.5 bibliometric.

The present study attempted to get a comprehensive understanding of the current state of PM2.5 research. By analyzing publication, we captured the collaboration pattern between countries/territories, institutions, and authors, better understood the global trend, and discovered the research frontiers in this field.

Methods

Data collection

All data were obtained from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) of Thomson Reuters on a single day, December 1, 2017. The WoSCC, including the Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) and the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), provides detailed information for bibliometric analysis (Yi et al. 2016).

In this study, the data retrieval strategy was as follows: (1) TOPIC: (“pm2.5”) or TOPIC: (“fine particulate matter”) or TOPIC: (“pm 2.5”) or TOPIC: (“pm(2.5)”) or TOPIC: (“fine particulate”) or TOPIC: (“particulate matter 2.5”). (2) All references were from 1997 to 2016. (3) Document Types were articles or reviews. (4) Languages were English. Flow chart of literature inclusion is shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1

The process of retrieval and exclusion criteria

Statistical analysis

The data of all eligible publications, including publication years, countries/territories, institutions, journal sources, research areas, co-cited references, and keywords, were downloaded for further analysis.

To predict the time trend of the publication, the model f(x) = ax3 + bx2 + cx + d was used by Microsoft Excel 2016 (Redmond, WA, USA). The symbol x was the “publication year: 1997–2016” and f(x) was the cumulative papers by year.

The statistical results were displayed by the CiteSpace V (Drexel University, Philadelphia, USA), a visualization software for analyzing data by network modeling (Chen et al. 2012; Synnestvedt et al. 2005).

The analyses at the literature level (contributing countries/institutions/authors, citing journals and cited journals, co-citation on authors and references, changes in research areas) were based on CiteSpace V. The parameters of CiteSpace were as follows: (1) Time Slicing: 1997–2016; (2) Years Per Slice: “1”; (3) Term Source: Title, Abstract, Author Keywords, and Keyword Plus; (4) Node Type: select the corresponding one each time; (5) Selection Criteria: the top 50, (6) Pruning: Minimum Spanning Tree and Pruning Sliced Networks; and (7) Visualization: Cluster View-Static and Show Merged Network.

Results and discussion

Global publications and growth prediction

From 1997 to 2016, a total of 13,681 publications matched with the search criteria of this study (Fig. 1). The distribution of yearly outputs is shown in Fig. 2a. As time went on, the number of publications was continually increasing, but the growth rate of publications had some fluctuations. The overall publishing trend increased from 51 publications in 1997 to 2088 publications in 2016, revealing that the research on PM2.5 had nearly consistently been the focus of scholars’ attention.
Fig. 2

Publication outputs and growth prediction. a The number of annual publications on PM2.5 research from 1997 to 2016. b The model-fitting curve of growth trend of PM2.5 publications

Figure 2b shows the growth trend of the model-fitting curve, indicating a significant correlation between the number of yearly publications and the publishing years (R2 = 0.9834). Using the prediction model, nearly 2300 publications will be published in 2017.

In the past 20 years, the overall trend of PM2.5 research has been growing. The publication year can be divided into the following three phases. The first phase ran from 1997 to 2003 with slowly increased publications and can be considered as the initial stage of PM2.5 research. The second phase ran from 2004 to 2011 maintaining a steady growth rate, indicating that people gradually paid attention to PM2.5 and attached importance to the related environmental problems. Compared with the past 15 years, the publication of the third phase (2012–2016) was exploding, counting for more than 50% (7275/13,681).

Contributions of countries/territories

Geographical distribution map can be created using Generate Google Earth Maps in CiteSpace (Fig. 3). It showed that countries/territories in East Asia (China, Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea), North America (The USA, Mexico, and Canada), and Europe (England, Italy, Germany, and Spain) participated in PM2.5 research actively. The results of the geographical map were consistent with the Network map (Fig. 4a). Furthermore, there was extensive cooperation between countries/regions. The USA ranked first in the number of publications (5941, 43.43%), followed by China (2863, 20.93%) and Canada (832, 6.08%) (Table 1).
Fig. 3

Geographical map of countries/territory publication from 1997 to 2016

Fig. 4

The analysis of countries/territories and institutions. a Network map of countries/territories engaged in PM2.5 research. b Network map of institutions engaged in PM2.5 research

Table 1

The distribution, citation frequency, and H-index of publications in the top 20 countries/territories

Number

Countries/territories

Publication

%

Total citations

H-index

1

USA

5941

43.43%

217,009

172

2

People’s Republic of China

2863

20.93%

70,822

103

3

Canada

832

6.08%

34,787

75

4

England

730

5.34%

32,721

86

5

Italy

692

5.06%

20,817

68

6

Germany

667

4.88%

33,189

87

7

Spain

560

4.09%

22,791

70

8

Taiwan

558

4.08%

13,382

47

9

India

492

3.60%

11,372

43

10

Japan

454

3.32%

12,817

53

11

South Korea

428

3.13%

12,634

48

12

France

411

3.00%

15,805

57

13

The Netherlands

390

2.85%

24,811

75

14

Greece

357

2.61%

15,536

56

15

Finland

325

2.38%

13,024

63

16

Switzerland

304

2.22%

18,432

58

17

Australia

286

2.09%

11,275

45

18

Sweden

278

2.03%

13,858

53

19

Brazil

222

1.62%

4910

35

20

Mexico

193

1.41%

9290

42

The number of citation and H-indexes of the top 20 countries/regions are shown in Table 1 and Fig. 5. The USA had both the highest citation frequencies (217,009) and the highest value of H-index (172). China ranked second both in citation frequency (70,822) and in H-index (103). The rest of the top 20 countries/regions had no clear gaps in these two items.
Fig. 5

The number of publication, citations, and H-indexes on PM2.5 research of the top 20 countries/territories

Contributions of journals

Almost half of the publications on PM2.5 research were published in the top 15 scholarly journals (6814, 49.81%), as shown in Fig. 6a. Atmospheric Environment, in which impact factor (IF) 2016 is 3.629, published the most studies (2254, 17.11%), and Journal of the air & Waste management association ranked second (578, 4.41%).
Fig. 6

Contributions of different journals and institutes to PM2.5 research. a Distribution of top 15 journals published on PM2.5 research. b the top 15 research areas focusing on PM2.5 research

A dual-map overlay of journals was displayed using the CiteSpace (Fig. 7). The citing journals map and the cited journals map were the right cluster and the left cluster, respectively. The longitudinal axis of ellipses represented the paper numbers, and the horizontal axis represented the author numbers. The lines that started from the left to the right were citation links. This dual-map overlay indicated that most articles were published in medicine, medical, clinical, molecular, biology, immunology, veterinary, animal, and science journals, and they mainly cited journals from health, nursing, medicine, molecular, biology, genetics, environment, toxicology, and nutrition.
Fig. 7

The dual-map overlay of journals related to PM2.5 research

Regarding the top 15 journals, Environmental Health Perspectives (IF2016, 9.776) had an impact factor (IF) greater than 9.000. Three of the journals, including Environmental Science Technology (IF2016, 6.198), Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (IF2016, 5.318), and Environmental Pollution (IF2016, 5.099) had IF between 5.000 and 9.000. Five of the journals, including Atmospheric Environment (IF2016, 3.629), Science of the Total Environment (IF2016, 4.900), Journal of Geophysical Research (IF2016, 3.454), Atmospheric Research (IF2016, 3.629), and Environmental Research (IF2016, 3.83), had IF between 3.000 and 5.000. There was five articles in the New England Journal of Medicine (IF2016, 72.406), three reviews and five articles in the Lancet (IF2016, 47.831), and two articles in Nature (IF2016, 40.137). In summary, future development in the PM2.5 field would likely be showcased in Atmospheric Environment because it published the most articles in the past.

Contributions of institutions

The cooperation between institutions is shown in Fig. 4b, and over 7600 institutions contributed to the publications on PM2.5 research. The top 20 institutes are listed in Table 2. Chinese Academy of Sciences accounted for 5.80%, followed by University of California System (5.42%) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (5.05%). Among the top 20 institutions, there were 14 American institutes, five Chinese institutes and one Canadian institution.
Table 2

The top 20 institutions contributed to publications on PM2.5 research

Rank

Institutes

Publication

%

1

Chinese Academy of Sciences

793

5.80%

2

University of California System

742

5.42%

3

United States Environmental Protection Agency

691

5.05%

4

Harvard University

612

4.47%

5

Peking University

344

2.51%

6

University System of Georgia

308

2.25%

7

Nevada System of Higher Education NSHE

282

2.06%

8

Tsinghua University

279

2.04%

9

University of North Carolina

279

2.04%

10

University of Washington

270

1.97%

11

Desert Research Institute NSHE

264

1.93%

12

University of Washington Seattle

264

1.93%

13

University of California Davis

245

1.79%

14

Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas CSIC

240

1.75%

15

Georgia Institute of Technology

232

1.70%

16

University of California Berkeley

231

1.69%

17

Institute of Atmospheric Physics CAS

218

1.59%

18

University of Southern California

209

1.53%

19

United States Department of Energy DOE

201

1.47%

20

HLTH Canada

193

1.41%

Through the above analysis, we found that the USA ranked first in productivity, and contribution of Asian and European countries was also prominent. Among top 20 countries/territories, only four development countries (China, India, Brazil, and Mexico) were development countries. China ranked second in publication, making significant progress in the PM2.5 field. Furthermore, in the list of top 20 institutions, there were 14 American institutes, five Chinese institutes, and one Canadian institution. These results indicate that the USA and China were the leading countries in the PM2.5 research.

Research areas

Figure 6b shows the PM2.5 research areas. Obviously, environmental science ecology is still a hot area, with 8365 documents. Other hot fields included meteorology atmospheric science, engineering, public environmental occupational health, and toxicology.

Contributions of authors

Generating a co-author map using CiteSpace outlined the cooperation between authors (Fig. 8a). Regarding the authors who were active, Querol X ranked the first (187 publications), followed by Schauer JJ (161 publications) and Hopke PK (159 publications). The top 10 authors are presented in Table 3.
Fig. 8

The analysis of authors. a Network map of active authors contributed to PM2.5 research. b Network map of co-cited authors contributed to PM2.5 research

Table 3

The top 10 authors, co-cited authors, and co-cited references in PM2.5 research

Number

Author

Count

Co-cited author

Count

Co-cited reference

Count

1

Querol X

187

Pope CA

5019

Dockery DW, 1993, New Engl J Med, v329, p1753

1200

2

Schauer JJ

161

Chow JC

3447

Pope CA, 2002, Jama-J Am Med Assoc, v287, p1132

1103

3

Hopke PK

159

Schwartz J

2563

Pope CA, 2006, J Air Waste Manage, v56, p709

957

4

Cao JJ

151

Dockery DW

2227

Brook RD, 2010, Circulation, v21, p2331

624

5

Alastuey A

147

Watson JG

2087

Turpin BJ, 2001, Aerosol Sci Tech, v35, p602

541

6

Chow JC

145

Schauer JJ

1740

Seinfeld J. H., 1998, Atmospheric Chem Phy

525

7

Schwartz J

145

Brook RD

1579

Birch ME, 1996, Aerosol Sci Tech, v25, p221

465

8

Koutrakis P

144

US EPA*

1540

Schwartz J, 1996, J Air Waste Manage, v46, p927

462

9

Brunekreef B

140

Paatero P

1501

Pope CA, 1995, Am J Resp Crit Care, v151, p669

439

10

Watson JG

135

Turpin BJ

1494

He KB, 2001, Atmos Environ, v35, p4959

424

*US EPA is a group author

To estimate the scientific relevance of publications, author citations have been analyzed using CiteSpace and presented as citation networks (Fig. 8b). As shown in Table 3, the top three co-cited authors are Pope CA (5019 citations), Chow JC (3447 citations), and Schwartz J (2563 citations).

Regarding the top 10 authors, each contributed to at least 135 publications, known as “prolific authors.” Querol X et al. (2014, 2016, 2004) focused on atmospheric environmental assessment of particulate matter pollution in Spain. Schauer JJ et al.’s (Schauer 2015; Schauer et al. 2002, 2001) articles emphasized the environmental health research and atmospheric chemistry. Hopke PK et al. (Hwang et al. 2008; Ogundele et al. 2016; Tiwari et al. 2015) looked into the environmental monitoring and analytic technology of air pollution source. Three of the prolific authors (Chow JC, Schauer JJ, and Schwartz J) were listed in the top 10 co-cited authors of the citation, indicating that they played an important role in the PM2.5 study. For co-cited authors, the authors with at least 2500 co-citation counts, including Pope CA, Chow JC and Schwartz J, and Pope CA et al. (Lux and Pope 2009; Pope 2015; Pope et al. 1999) mainly explored the heart disease associated with particulate air pollution. Chow JC et al. (Chow et al. 2015, 2005, 2006) made crucial contributions to atmospheric chemistry and PM2.5 monitoring. Schwartz et al.(2015, 2005) and Schwartz and Neas (2000) studied the relationship between air pollution and health. These scholars were leaders in the PM2.5 research, and their reports could have a huge impact in the future and help others to open their minds.

Reference analysis on PM2.5

Reference analysis is one of the most important indexes of bibliometrics. A cited reference co-citation map was generated with 532 nodes and 926 links (Fig. 9a). Each cluster revealed the core literature group, high citation, and academic relationship in each period, and revealed research field, structure, and branches, showing a distinct specialty or a thematic concentration. Among the 17 clusters, cluster #0 (particulate pollution) was largest, followed by cluster #1 (Beijing), cluster #2 (chemical mass balance), and cluster #3 (sulfate). All clusters were also presented in a timeline view, showing the progress of the subject and the development trend (Fig. 9b).
Fig. 9

The analysis of references. a Co-citation map of references from publications on PM2.5 research. b Co-citation map (timeline view) of references from publications on PM2.5 research

The reference co-citation time-view map indicated that most clusters were concentrated between 2006 and 2012. The top ten co-cited references are listed in Table 3, which were regarded as the knowledge base for the PM2.5 research. Among them, an article that Dockery DW published in the New England Journal of Medicine had the highest value of citations (1993, 1200 citations), suggesting that it played fundamental and important role in the PM2.5 research, followed by articles published by Pope CA (2002, 1103 citations) in JAMA, Pope CA (2006, 957 citations) in Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 1995, and Brook RD (2010, 624 citations) in Circulation. Furthermore, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, American Journal of Respiratory, and Critical Care Medicine and Atmospheric Environment also published some highly influence articles in this field. These journals were fundamental for PM2.5 research.

Analysis of keywords

Keywords can reflect reasonable descriptions of research hotspots (some researchers’ concerns about a series of related research questions and concepts), and burst words (emerging trends and abrupt changes over a period) could indicate new frontier topics. Therefore, we can comprehend an understanding of the development of research topic through the keywords of an article (Chen et al. 2012; Synnestvedt et al. 2005). Keywords with the strongest citation bursts were detected and analyzed using CiteSpace, shown in Fig. 10, and we deduced the top four research hotspots and listed the following: climate change (2015–2016), meta-analysis (2015–2016), cardiovascular mortality (2015–2016), and long-term exposure (2015–2016).
Fig. 10

The keywords with the strongest citation bursts of publications on PM2.5 research. The time intervals were plotted on the blue line, while the periods of burst keywords were plotted on the red line, indicating the beginning and end of the time interval of each burst

Climate-change

Climate change, exclusive of changes in air pollutant emissions, can significantly increase levels of PM2.5 and affects mortality associated with PM2.5 pollutants. (Forsberg et al. 2012; Garcia-Menendez et al. 2015; Madaniyazi et al. 2015; Tagaris et al. 2009).

Meta-analysis

The statistical analysis of a large collection of analysis results from individual studies for the purpose of integrating the findings (Tucker 1996). Many meta-analysis papers on PM2.5 research have been published in recent years, including some high-quality papers (Atkinson et al. 2014; Avery et al. 2010; Singh et al. 2017).

Cardiovascular mortality

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) include disorders of the heart and blood vessels, particularly those supplying the brain (ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke) (Wang et al. 2015). Long-term exposure to PM2.5 can increase risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality (Lee et al. 2014; Pope et al. 2015; Tillett 2012).

Long-term exposure

To assess the effect of long-term exposure to PM2.5, increasing scholars have been committed to this field and have reported that long-term exposure to PM2.5 can elevate the risk of various diseases, including type 2 diabetes mellitus (Wang et al., 2014a, b), cardiovascular diseases (Pope et al. 2015), and chronic airway diseases (Ren et al. 2016).

PM2.5 and PM10

From 1997 to 2016, a total of 10,355 papers of PM10 were published (Supplementary Fig. 1). The overall trend of PM10 research was growing and maintaining a steady growth rate (Supplementary Fig. 1). However, the publication of PM2.5 started to explode from 2012, indicating that more researches focused on PM2.5. Similarly, Figs. 9 and 10 show that PM10 research was the hotspot about 5 years ago. Admittedly, PM10, as well as PM2.5, has adverse health effects. Accumulated evidence reported that PM10 could harm the human respiratory system, immune system, and circulatory system (Reyes-Zarate et al. 2016; Saygin et al. 2017; Xu et al. 2017). However, PM2.5 should be attached more importantly. Firstly, many cities have exceeded the WHO air quality guidelines of PM10 (50 μg/m3) and PM2.5 (25 μg/m3) (Lu et al. 2015). By analyzing the published data, Zhou et al. (2016) claimed that abatement of PM2.5 was crucial for cutting down pollution and improving air quality in China. Secondly, because their chemical composition, trace element content, strong acid content, sulfate content, and particle size distribution are different, PM2.5 are more toxic than PM10 (Harrison and Yin 2000). In addition, the WHO stated that PM2.5 was more hazardous than coarse particles (PM10) regarding mortality and cardiovascular and respiratory endpoints (Englert 2004). In the future, we should make an intensive study of PM2.5.

Contributions of bibliometric analysis

This study not only presented the global trend in PM2.5 research but also provided useful information for future PM2.5 research.

Why should we take PM2.5 seriously? The present study showed that PM2.5 increased the global burden. The first, high-density population and industrial production will inevitably discharge a large number of fine particles. Nowadays, PM2.5 has been used for ambient air quality management worldwide (Weichenthal et al. 2013). As shown in Figs. 9 and 10, developing countries are currently facing severe air pollution in the rapid development stage, especially China. Less than 50 largest cities can reach air quality standards in China recommended by the WHO (Xing et al. 2016). Seven of these cities are listed as one of the 10 most polluted cities in the world. The second, PM2.5, as well as PM10, caused assignable negative effects on human health. By reference and hotspots analysis, related keywords are listed the following: inflammation, low birth weight, mortality, long-term exposure, and cardiovascular mortality. Exposure to them, the risk of cardiovascular mortality, heart rhythm abnormalities, and stroke could increase. However, the long-term effect of them is more severe, with evidence showing potentially harmful effects on cardiopulmonary function, neurodegeneration (Kioumourtzoglou et al. 2016), kidney function (Seltenrich 2016), pregnant women, and children. Global burden of environment and disease is becoming increasingly heavy under the catalysis of PM2.5, so we should face up to the harm of PM2.5 and reduce it.

How to evaluate PM2.5? Figures 9 and 10 show keywords, including “positive matrix factorization,” “ecological study,” “size distribution,” “use regression-model,” and “meta-analysis”. Mathematical statistics and epidemiological methods can be used to study the trace composition (Hu et al. 2014), the mechanism (Wang et al., 2014a, b), and harmful effects of PM2.5. In addition, we can use various statistical models (such as regression-model, Bayesian Hierarchy Model) to predict spatial variation (Wu et al. 2015), estimate global burden (Arnold 2014), study the source apportionment of PM2.5 (Taghvaee et al. 2018), and simulate the spatiotemporal distribution (Lee et al. 2016). In the future, the establishment of the models will be an important part of the PM2.5 research.

What should we do? Countries have actively taken measures to deal with PM2.5. In July 1997, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) first proposed to use PM2.5 as the national environmental air quality standard. The German government is energetically encouraging the installation of vehicle-exhaust-cleaning devices. In Tokyo, all taxis use natural gas. And in China, the government is establishing a nationwide monitoring network for air pollution to master characteristics and composition differences of PM2.5 in different regions. Moreover, for the individual, the awareness, like reducing diesel exhaust and personal exposure, is particularly important. Such awareness has the potential to create a cleaner environment and protect ourselves. Frank et al. suggested that such awareness is largely dependent on the best monitoring, prediction, and reporting of air pollution (Kelly and Fussell 2015). Sensitive populations (the elderly, children, and patients with chronic cardiopulmonary problems) should strengthen self-protection awareness, such as reducing personal exposure and taking antioxidant supplements or nutritious food (Xing et al. 2016). Therefore, in the future, scholars can be committed to the study of clean energy, and the public should improve the awareness of personal health and environmental protection.

Strengths and limitations

The present study is the first bibliometric analysis of the trend in PM2.5 research over the past decade. Data on PM2.5 publications in this study were retrieved and collected from WoSCC, and the analysis was relatively objective and comprehensive. This bibliometric study provided information about PM2.5 research, including the trend of PM2.5 research, cooperative institutions or authors, papers and journals with the reference value, and research frontiers in this field.

However, this study is not perfect with some limitations. First, the WoSCC database mainly includes literature in English and few non-English publications. Therefore, some high-quality non-English research studies on PM2.5 may be excluded, resulting in an incomplete analysis. Future work should involve other non-English language studies. Second, papers published in 2017 were not included in this study, so the analysis of popular topics did not cover the keywords of 2017.

Conclusion

Over the last 20 years, there have been increasing findings from many research disciplines (e.g., environmental science ecology, atmospheric science, engineering, public environmental occupational health, and toxicology) that mainly committed to reducing the impact of PM2.5 on health.

By the present a bibliometric study, including annual global publications, reference analysis, and research hotspots, we can find that more scholars have paid attention to PM2.5, especially cardiovascular mortality and the impact of long-term exposure to PM2.5. In conclusion, PM2.5 is a significant public health problem, responsible for potential long-term health effects, and we should pay attention to it, monitor it, and reduce it.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The present study was supported by the National key research and development program (2017YFC0211600) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81673132 and 81472939). Thanks to Yan Miao’s introduction of bibliometric analysis.

Supplementary material

11356_2018_1723_Fig10_ESM.gif (40 kb)
Supplementary Figure 1

Publication outputs and growth prediction. (A) The number of annual publications on PM10 research from 1997 to 2016; (B) The model-fitting curve of growth trend of PM10 publications. (GIF 39 kb)

11356_2018_1723_MOESM1_ESM.tif (6.4 mb)
High Resolution (TIFF 6590 kb)

References

  1. Arnold C (2014) Disease burdens associated with PM2.5 exposure: how a new model provided global estimates. Environ Health Perspect 122:A111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkinson RW, Kang S, Anderson HR, Mills IC, Walton HA (2014) Epidemiological time series studies of PM2.5 and daily mortality and hospital admissions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Thorax 69:660–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Avery CL, Mills KT, Williams R, McGraw KA, Poole C, Smith RL, Whitsel EA (2010) Estimating error in using residential outdoor PM2.5 concentrations as proxies for personal exposures: a meta-analysis. Environ Health Perspect 118:673–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buczynska AJ, Krata A, Van Grieken R, Brown A, Polezer G, De Wael K, Potgieter-Vermaak S (2014) Composition of PM2.5 and PM1 on high and low pollution event days and its relation to indoor air quality in a home for the elderly. Sci Total Environ 490:134–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Callen MS, Lopez JM, Mastral AM (2012) Apportionment of the airborne PM10 in Spain. Episodes of potential negative impact for human health. J Environ Monit : JEM 14:1211–1220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen C, Hu Z, Liu S, Tseng H (2012) Emerging trends in regenerative medicine: a scientometric analysis in CiteSpace. Expert Opin Biol Ther 12:593–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chow JC, Watson JG, Louie PK, Chen LW, Sin D (2005) Comparison of PM2.5 carbon measurement methods in Hong Kong, China. Environ Pollut 137:334–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chow JC, Watson JG, Lowenthal DH, Chen LW, Magliano KL (2006) Particulate carbon measurements in California’s San Joaquin Valley. Chemosphere 62:337–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chow JC, Lowenthal DH, Chen LW, Wang X, Watson JG (2015) Mass reconstruction methods for PM2.5: a review. Air Qual Atmos Health 8:243–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Collins D, Parsons M, Zinyemba C (2014) Air quality at outdoor community events: findings from fine particulate (PM2.5) sampling at festivals in Edmonton, Alberta. Int J Environ Health Res 24:215–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Englert N (2004) Fine particles and human health—a review of epidemiological studies. Toxicol Lett 149:235–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Forsberg B, Braback L, Keune H, Kobernus M, Krayer von Krauss M, Yang A, Bartonova A (2012) An expert assessment on climate change and health—with a European focus on lungs and allergies. Environ Health Glob Access Sci Source 11(Suppl 1):S4Google Scholar
  13. Garcia-Menendez F, Saari RK, Monier E, Selin NE (2015) U.S. air quality and health benefits from avoided climate change under greenhouse gas mitigation. Environ Sci Technol 49:7580–7588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Harrison RM, Yin J (2000) Particulate matter in the atmosphere: which particle properties are important for its effects on health? Sci Total Environ 249:85–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hu J, Zhang H, Chen SH, Wiedinmyer C, Vandenberghe F, Ying Q, Kleeman MJ (2014): Predicting primary PM2.5 and PM0.1 trace composition for epidemiological studies in California. Environ Sci Technol 48, 4971–4979Google Scholar
  16. Huo MQ, Sun Q, Xie P, Bai YH, Liu ZR, Li JL, Lu SH (2009): [Relationship between atmospheric particles and rain water chemistry character]. Huan jing ke xue= Huanjing Kexue 30, 3159–3166Google Scholar
  17. Hwang I, Hopke PK, Pinto JP (2008): Source apportionment and spatial distributions of coarse particles during the Regional Air Pollution Study. Environ Sci Technol 42, 3524–3530Google Scholar
  18. Kelly FJ, Fussell JC (2015) Air pollution and public health: emerging hazards and improved understanding of risk. Environ Geochem Health 37:631–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kioumourtzoglou MA, Schwartz JD, Weisskopf MG, Melly SJ, Wang Y, Dominici F, Zanobetti A (2016) Long-term PM2.5 exposure and neurological hospital admissions in the Northeastern United States. Environ Health Perspect 124:23–29Google Scholar
  20. Lee BJ, Kim B, Lee K (2014) Air pollution exposure and cardiovascular disease. Toxicol Res 30:71–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lee CL, Huang HC, Wang CC, Sheu CC, Wu CC, Leung SY, Lai RS, Lin CC, Wei YF, Lai IC, Jiang H, Chou WL, Chung WY, Huang MS, Huang SK (2016) A new grid-scale model simulating the spatiotemporal distribution of PM2.5-PAHs for exposure assessment. J Hazard Mater 314:286–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lin G, Fu J, Jiang D, Wang J, Wang Q, dong D (2015) Spatial variation of the relationship between PM 2.5 concentrations and meteorological parameters in China. Biomed Res Int 2015:684618Google Scholar
  23. Lu F, Xu D, Cheng Y, Dong S, Guo C, Jiang X, Zheng X (2015) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the adverse health effects of ambient PM2.5 and PM10 pollution in the Chinese population. Environ Res 136:196–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lux RL, Pope CA, 3rd (2009) Air pollution effects on ventricular repolarization. Research report, 3–20; discussion 21–8Google Scholar
  25. Madaniyazi L, Guo Y, Yu W, Tong S (2015) Projecting future air pollution-related mortality under a changing climate: progress, uncertainties and research needs. Environ Int 75:21–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ogundele LT, Owoade OK, Olise FS, Hopke PK (2016) Source identification and apportionment of PM2.5 and PM2.5 -10 in iron and steel scrap smelting factory environment using PMF, PCFA and UNMIX receptor models. Environ Monit Assess 188:574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pope CA 3rd, Verrier RL, Lovett EG, Larson AC, Raizenne ME, Kanner RE, Schwartz J, Villegas GM, Gold DR, Dockery DW (1999) Heart rate variability associated with particulate air pollution. Am Heart J 138:890–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pope CA 3rd (2015) Ischaemic heart disease and fine particulate air pollution. Heart 101:248–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pope CA 3rd, Turner MC, Burnett RT, Jerrett M, Gapstur SM, Diver WR, Krewski D, Brook RD (2015) Relationships between fine particulate air pollution, cardiometabolic disorders, and cardiovascular mortality. Circ Res 116:108–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Querol X, Alastuey A, Rodriguez S, Viana MM, Artinano B, Salvador P, Mantilla E, Garcia do Santos S, Fernandez Patier R, de La Rosa J, Sanchez de la Campa A, Menendez M, Gil JJ (2004) Levels of particulate matter in rural, urban and industrial sites in Spain. Sci Total Environ 334-335:359–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Querol X, Alastuey A, Pandolfi M, Reche C, Perez N, Minguillon MC, Moreno T, Viana M, Escudero M, Orio A, Pallares M, Reina F (2014) 2001-2012 trends on air quality in Spain. Sci Total Environ 490:957–969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Querol X, Alastuey A, Reche C, Orio A, Pallares M, Reina F, Dieguez JJ, Mantilla E, Escudero M, Alonso L, Gangoiti G, Millan M (2016) On the origin of the highest ozone episodes in Spain. Sci Total Environ 572:379–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ren J, Li B, Yu D, Liu J, Ma Z (2016) Approaches to prevent the patients with chronic airway diseases from exacerbation in the haze weather. J Thorac Dis 8:E1–E7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Reyes-Zarate E, Sanchez-Perez Y, Gutierrez-Ruiz MC, Chirino YI, Osornio-Vargas AR, Morales-Barcenas R, Souza-Arroyo V, Garcia-Cuellar CM (2016) Atmospheric particulate matter (PM10) exposure-induced cell cycle arrest and apoptosis evasion through STAT3 activation via PKCzeta and Src kinases in lung cells. Environ Pollut 214:646–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Saygin M, Gonca T, Ozturk O, Has M, Caliskan S, Has ZG, Akkaya A (2017) To investigate the effects of air pollution (PM10 and SO2) on the respiratory diseases asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Turkish Thorac J 18:33–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schauer JJ, Kleeman MJ, Cass GR, Simoneit BR (2001): Measurement of emissions from air pollution sources. 3. C1-C29 organic compounds from fireplace combustion of wood. Environ Sci Technol 35, 1716–1728Google Scholar
  37. Schauer JJ, Fraser MP, Cass GR, Simoneit BR (2002): Source reconciliation of atmospheric gas-phase and particle-phase pollutants during a severe photochemical smog episode. Environ Sci Technol 36, 3806–3814Google Scholar
  38. Schauer JJ (2015) Design criteria for future fuels and related power systems addressing the impacts of non-CO2 pollutants on human health and climate change. Annual Rev Chem Biomol Eng 6:101–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schwartz J, Neas LM (2000) Fine particles are more strongly associated than coarse particles with acute respiratory health effects in schoolchildren. Epidemiology 11:6–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schwartz J, Park SK, O'Neill MS, Vokonas PS, Sparrow D, Weiss S, Kelsey K (2005) Glutathione-S-transferase M1, obesity, statins, and autonomic effects of particles: gene-by-drug-by-environment interaction. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 172:1529–1533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schwartz J, Austin E, Bind MA, Zanobetti A, Koutrakis P (2015) Estimating causal associations of fine particles with daily deaths in Boston. Am J Epidemiol 182:644–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Seltenrich N (2016) PM2.5 and kidney function: long-term exposures may lead to modest declines. Environ Health Perspect 124:A168Google Scholar
  43. Singh N, Murari V, Kumar M, Barman SC, Banerjee T (2017) Fine particulates over South Asia: review and meta-analysis of PM2.5 source apportionment through receptor model. Environ Pollut 223:121–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Synnestvedt MB, Chen C, Holmes JH (2005): CiteSpace II: visualization and knowledge discovery in bibliographic databases. AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 724–8Google Scholar
  45. Tagaris E, Liao KJ, Delucia AJ, Deck L, Amar P, Russell AG (2009) Potential impact of climate change on air pollution-related human health effects. Environ Sci Technol 43:4979–4988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Taghvaee S, Sowlat MH, Mousavi A, Hassanvand MS, Yunesian M, Naddafi K, Sioutas C (2018) Source apportionment of ambient PM2.5 in two locations in Central Tehran using the positive matrix factorization (PMF) model. Sci Total Environ 628-629:672–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tillett T (2012) Hearts over time: cardiovascular mortality risk linked to long-term PM2.5 exposure. Environ Health Perspect 120:A205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tiwari S, Pipal AS, Hopke PK, Bisht DS, Srivastava AK, Tiwari S, Saxena PN, Khan AH, Pervez S (2015) Study of the carbonaceous aerosol and morphological analysis of fine particles along with their mixing state in Delhi, India: a case study. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 22:10744–10757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tucker K (1996) The use of epidemiologic approaches and meta-analysis to determine mineral element requirements. J Nutr 126:2365S–2372SCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wang B, Xu D, Jing Z, Liu D, Yan S, Wang Y (2014b) Effect of long-term exposure to air pollution on type 2 diabetes mellitus risk: a systemic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Eur J Endocrinol 171:R173–R182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wang C, Tu Y, Yu Z, Lu R (2015) PM2.5 and cardiovascular diseases in the elderly: an overview. Int J Environ Res Public Health 12:8187–8197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wang Y, Eliot MN, Wellenius GA (2014a) Short-term changes in ambient particulate matter and risk of stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Heart Assoc 3:e000983CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wang Y, Zhai X, Liu C, Wang N, Wang Y (2016) Trends of triple negative breast cancer research (2007-2015): a bibliometric study. Medicine 95:e5427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Weichenthal S, Hoppin JA, Reeves F (2014) Obesity and the cardiovascular health effects of fine particulate air pollution. Obesity 22:1580–1589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Weichenthal SA, Godri-Pollitt K, Villeneuve PJ (2013) PM2.5, oxidant defence and cardiorespiratory health: a review. Environ Health Glob Access Sci Source 12:40Google Scholar
  56. Wu J, Li J, Peng J, Li W, Xu G, Dong C (2015) Applying land use regression model to estimate spatial variation of PM2.5 in Beijing, China. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 22:7045–7061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Xing YF, Xu YH, Shi MH, Lian YX (2016) The impact of PM2.5 on the human respiratory system. J Thorac Dis 8:E69–E74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Xu A, Mu Z, Jiang B, Wang W, Yu H, Zhang L, Li J (2017) Acute effects of particulate air pollution on ischemic heart disease hospitalizations in Shanghai, China. Int J Environ Res Public Health 14Google Scholar
  59. Yi F, Yang P, Sheng H (2016) Tracing the scientific outputs in the field of Ebola research based on publications in the Web of Science. BMC research notes 9, 221Google Scholar
  60. Zhou X, Cao Z, Ma Y, Wang L, Wu R, Wang W (2016) Concentrations, correlations and chemical species of PM2.5/PM10 based on published data in China: potential implications for the revised particulate standard. Chemosphere 144:518–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sheng Yang
    • 1
  • Jing Sui
    • 1
  • Tong Liu
    • 1
  • Wenjuan Wu
    • 1
  • Siyi Xu
    • 1
  • Lihong Yin
    • 1
  • Yuepu Pu
    • 1
  • Xiaomei Zhang
    • 2
  • Yan Zhang
    • 2
  • Bo Shen
    • 2
  • Geyu Liang
    • 1
  1. 1.Key Laboratory of Environmental Medicine Engineering, Ministry of Education, School of Public HealthSoutheast UniversityNanjingPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Jiangsu Cancer HospitalNanjingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations