Auto Cost Compared

Evidence map

Transport health: what the evidence base looks like

4 publications, 0 of them trials and 2 syntheses. This page describes the shape of that literature rather than summarising its conclusions.

Updated 3 min read 4 citations

What the evidence on transport health is made of Of 4 publications on this topic, the breakdown by study type: 2 meta-analysis, 2 other. 22meta-analysis (2)other (2)
4 publications, by study type. Volume is not strength — the same count can be a settled question or a pile of commentary, and which one it is depends almost entirely on this breakdown. Harvested from PubMed and Crossref; publication type as recorded by the source.

What this literature is made of

The synthesis is ahead of the primary literature here — reviews and meta-analyses drawing on a modest number of underlying studies. Treat confident conclusions with the caution the sample size deserves.

The distinction that matters most is between synthesis and primary research. A meta-analysis pools trials and is the closest thing to a settled answer a field produces. A narrative review is one group's reading of the same material and can be selective without being dishonest. Counting them together, which most citation counts do, obscures exactly the thing you want to know.

When the transport health literature was published Publication years for the 4 papers on this topic, grouped into bands from before 2015 through to 2023 onwards. 2023 onwards2 papers2020-20222 papers
Still active. The most recent paper here is from 2026, so this is a field where an answer written today may not hold for long. Publication years as recorded by PubMed and Crossref.

How this page is built

Everything above is computed from the citations this site harvested from PubMed and Crossref, not written by hand. When the weekly harvest finds a new paper on this topic, these counts change and the characterisation changes with them. That is the point: a hand-written claim about how strong an evidence base is starts decaying the day it is written.

Publication type is taken as the source records it. That is imperfect — journals label inconsistently, and a paper indexed as a "review" may be a systematic one — so treat the bands as approximate. They are accurate enough to distinguish a trial literature from a commentary literature, which is the distinction that matters.

The strongest work on this topic

Ordered by study design first, then recency. The full set is listed in the references below.

  1. Air quality and public health co-benefits of national transport policies — Naw ATH, Papong S, Rattanapan C et al., 2026, systematic review
  2. Integrating Air Quality and Public Health Benefits in U.S. Decarbonization Strategies — Gallagher CL, Holloway T, 2020, systematic review
  3. Carbon mitigation and health effects of fleet electrification in China's Yangtze River Delta — Zhu Y, Liu Y, Liu X et al., 2023, journal article
  4. Health benefits from cleaner vehicles and increased active transportation in Seattle, Washington — Filigrana P, Levy JI, Gauthier J et al., 2022, journal article
How much research is there on transport health?
4 publications are indexed here, of which 0 are trials and 2 are syntheses.
Does more research mean a stronger conclusion?
No. Composition matters more than volume — five randomised trials support a claim far better than fifty commentaries, and citation counts do not distinguish between them.
How current is this?
The most recent paper indexed here is from 2026. The set is refreshed weekly from PubMed and Crossref.
Why does this page not tell me the answer?
Because summarising a literature into a conclusion requires reading it, and doing that automatically is how confident nonsense gets published. This page tells you how much weight a conclusion could bear; the articles on this site do the interpreting.

References

Every citation below links to the original peer-reviewed record on PubMed or via DOI. Nothing here is a substitute for medical advice.

  1. Air quality and public health co-benefits of national transport policies Naw ATH, Papong S, Rattanapan C, et al. · Reviews on environmental health · 2026 · Systematic review DOIPubMed 42137951
  2. Integrating Air Quality and Public Health Benefits in U.S. Decarbonization Strategies Gallagher CL, Holloway T · Frontiers in public health · 2020 · Systematic review DOIPubMed 33330312Full text
  3. Carbon mitigation and health effects of fleet electrification in China's Yangtze River Delta Zhu Y, Liu Y, Liu X, et al. · Environment international · 2023 · Journal article DOIPubMed 37717521
  4. Health benefits from cleaner vehicles and increased active transportation in Seattle, Washington Filigrana P, Levy JI, Gauthier J, et al. · Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2022 · Journal article DOIPubMed 35288650Full text