Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100. Prevention and risk

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background A rapidly evolving evidence base suggests that exposure to outdoor air pollution is a risk factor for the onset of dementia, with an upturn in publications since 2022. Study-level risk of bias and confidence in the overall body of evidence were assessed with the Office of Health Assessment and Translation tool, and publication bias was examined. In meta-analyses of incident dementia, we identified a dementia diagnosis to be significantly associated with long-term exposure to PM 2·5 (21 studies, n=24 030 527, pooled adjusted hazard ratio (HR) per 5 μg/m 3 increase in exposure, 1·08 [95% CI 1·02-1·14]; I 2 =95%), nitrogen dioxide (16 studies, n=17 228 429, pooled adjusted HR per 10 μg/m 3 increase, 1·03 [1·01-1·05]; I 2 =84%), and black carbon/PM 2·5 absorbance (six studies, n=19 421 865, pooled adjusted HR per 1 μg/m 3 increase, 1·13 [1·01-1·27]; I 2 =97%). We found no significant association for exposure to nitrogen oxides (five studies, n=241 409, pooled adjusted HR per 10 μg/m 3 increase, 1·05 [0·97-1·13]; I 2 =44%), PM 10 (four studies, n=246 440, pooled adjusted HR per 15 μg/m 3 increase, 1·52 [0·80-2·87]; I 2 =82%), or annual ozone (four studies, n=419 972, pooled adjusted HR per 45 μg/m 3 increase, 0·82 [0·35-1·92]; I 2 =69%), with moderate to considerable heterogeneity between studies in these pooled analyses. Of the 32 studies overall, three (9%) had a probably high risk of bias in one of seven domains; all other studies had ratings of probably to definitely low risk of bias. The overall certainty of evidence of studies in the systematic review was moderate.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Best Rogowski, C. B., Bredell, C., Shi, Y., Tien-Smith, A., Szybka, M., Fung, K. W., et al. (2025). Long-term air pollution exposure and incident dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Planetary Health. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(25)00118-4

Vancouver

Best Rogowski CB, Bredell C, Shi Y, Tien-Smith A, Szybka M, Fung KW, et al. Long-term air pollution exposure and incident dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Planetary Health. 2025. doi:10.1016/S2542-5196(25)00118-4. PMID: 40716448.

BibTeX

@article{bestrogowski2025-40716448,
  author  = {Best Rogowski, C. B. and Bredell, C. and Shi, Y. and Tien-Smith, A. and Szybka, M. and Fung, K. W. and others},
  title   = {{Long-term air pollution exposure and incident dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis}},
  journal = {Lancet Planetary Health},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.1016/S2542-5196(25)00118-4},
  pmid    = {40716448},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(25)00118-4}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Why it matters

This review found that long-term exposure to fine particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide, and black carbon was significantly associated with a dementia diagnosis, while no significant association was found for nitrogen oxides, larger particles, or ozone. The authors note that most included studies had a probable high risk of bias.

Study details

Limitations

Very high heterogeneity; exposure estimated from residential address; cannot identify critical exposure windows.

How this study scored 69/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 1 of 4; Study design 12 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 4 of 5; Sample size 4 of 4; Effect reported 3 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 4 of 7; Citations per year 3 of 5; Impact for its field and year 3 of 6; Cited by studies here 1 of 6; Still being cited 2 of 4; Senior author's track record 2 of 4; Institution's track record 2 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 2 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read left out, no data. 68 of the 98 points it could be judged on, which is 69 of 100. Total 69 of 100.68 of the 98 points we could judge = 69 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. We have no data on free to read, so that was left out: it earned 68 of the 98 points we could judge it on, which is 69 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Lancet Planetary Health)
Journal's citation record 1 / 4 The Lancet Planetary Health: journal h-index 139 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 12 / 12 A meta-analysis pooling many studies
Strength of evidence 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 4 / 5 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 4 / 4 24,030,527 participants
Effect reported 3 / 3 Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 A review of other studies — randomisation is not credited here
Times cited 4 / 7 Cited 40 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 3 / 5 13.3 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025
Impact for its field and year 3 / 6 Cited 6.7× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 1 / 6 Cited by 1 other studies in this library
Still being cited 2 / 4 Cited 40 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 2 / 4 Last-listed author Haneen Khreis: h-index 39 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 2 / 3 University of Cambridge: institution h-index 1,973 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 2 / 3 OpenAlex lists 6 institution(s) in 3 countries
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40716448)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 68 / 98 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 68 of the 98 points we could judge it on is 69 out of 100.
Total 69 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — Unpaywall lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 10 Oct 2026).

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 16.

Later studies that cite this one

1 study in the alzhub library lists this one in its references.

Related studies in Prevention and risk

Also tagged “prevalence”

1,224 studies in the library carry the topic tag “prevalence”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,224 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Prevention and risk

See all studies in Prevention and risk →