This is a Preprint and has not been peer reviewed. This is version 1 of this Preprint.
Human health impacts of PFAS exposure: A second-order meta-analysis
Downloads
Authors
Abstract
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are highly persistent synthetic chemicals with pervasive human exposure. Numerous meta-analyses have synthesised results on the association between PFAS exposure and human health, yet findings remain fragmented and often inconsistent across compounds, outcomes, and studies. We assessed the magnitude and consistency of associations between PFAS exposure and human health outcomes by integrating evidence from 23 meta-analyses encompassing 161 primary studies. PFAS exposure was associated with a 5% increase in the odds of adverse health outcomes (overall OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 1.03–1.08) and a moderate heterogeneity (overall I² = 64%, 95% CI: 42–78%). Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS) showed the largest and most consistent association among chemicals (OR = 1.30, I² = 38.1%), endocrine diseases showed the strongest association among health outcomes (OR = 1.11, I² = 61.7%), and pregnancy-related outcomes showed the highest consistency (OR = 1.04, I² = 35.9%). The widespread nature of PFAS exposure means even small relative risks could translate into substantial population-level burdens. These findings strengthen the evidence base for regulatory measures, highlight vulnerable health domains, and identify priority areas for further research, particularly for understudied compounds and outcomes.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.31223/X5WJ7N
Subjects
Environmental Public Health, Public Health
Keywords
Meta-meta-analysis, Epidemiology, Endocrine disruptors, Hypertension, Pregnancy, Evidence synthesis, Risk assessment
Dates
Published: 2026-10-04 13:02
Last Updated: 2026-10-04 13:02
License
CC BY Attribution 4.0 International
Additional Metadata
Conflict of interest statement:
Lorenzo Ricolfi is currently employed by EPA Victoria. The research was conducted and the manuscript was written while the author was a PhD candidate at University of New South Wales, prior to this employment. EPA Victoria had no role in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, writing, or the decision to submit for publication. The views expressed are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of EPA Victoria.
Data Availability:
The raw data and the analysis code can be downloaded from our GitHub repository.
Metrics
Views: 11
Downloads: 1
There are no comments or no comments have been made public for this article.