Influence of coal-derived air pollutants on cognitive and neurobehavioral function among children

Authors

DOI:

Keywords

cognitive function, coal exposure, fine particulate matters

Correspondence

Shanmugananth Elayaperumal
Email: haripratha18@gmail.com

Publication history

Received: 18 Apr 2026
Accepted: 28 May 2026
Published online: 24 June 2026

Responsible editor

Reviewers

Funding

None

Ethical approval

Approved by the Institutional Scientific Review Board of School of Physiotherapy, Puducherry, India. (No: MPT/ISRB/2025/025, Dated 15 Dec 2025).

Trial registration number

Not applicable

Copyright

© The Author(s) 2026; all rights reserved. 
Published by Bangladesh Medical University (former Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University).
Key messages
Exposure to fine particulate matters increases the risk of cognitive impairment. A community based cross-sectional study was conducted on 115 participants aged between 8 to 12 years. The study showed that children living within 10 miles from the coal-fired plants have higher prevalence of cognitive and neuro-behavioral changes compared to children living away 40 miles.

Fine Fine particulate matter is one of the leading causes of ambient air pollution that threatens the global public health. About seven million premature deaths occur annually in low- and middle-income countries [1]. Among all air pollutants, coal dust arising from the processes of coal extraction, storage, and combustion, with the fine particles generated during coal mining, contributes to major personal health and occupational-related complications [2]. Burned coal produces a waste by-product known as coal ash which is a major component and inhalable particulate matter ranging in diameter from 0.1 μm to >10 μm [3]. The fly ash consisted of concentrated metal (loids), approximately 2 –10 times more concentrated than the parent coal and found that concentration of lead in coal fly ash was 35 (parts per million) ppm compared to only 4 ppm in parent coal [4].

Long-term exposure to fine dust particles allows them to enter the lungs through nasal passages and penetrate the bloodstream, ultimately breaching the blood-brain barrier. These particles diffuse directly into the deep brain tissues via synaptic transmission. This process triggers an increase in beta-amyloid proteins, their precursor protein-cleaving enzymes, cyclooxygenase and pro-inflammatory cytokines, ultimately causing disruptive changes in brain networks [5]. The intensifying dust concentration produces atrophy in frontal lobe, parietal lobe, occipital lobe and internal capsule and significantly influences anomalies of brain and contributes to serious central nervous system disorders which mainly deteriorates to cognitive function such as memory, thought processes, spatial orientation, language abilities, social and judgmental capabilities [6].

A cross-sectional study conducted on 111 children aged between 4 to 17 years living adjacent to coal ash storages and a non – exposed area, found that the power plant was used since 1950 and burned 1.3 million tons of coal annually and coal ash components such as lead, mercury and arsenic induces severe adverse health outcomes affecting multiple organ systems and disrupts brain development which impairs cognitive function [7]. Comparing the relative studies impact of particulate matters from coal dust exposure is highly significant risk factor for cognitive decline. Hence, the objective of the present study was to assess the association between coal-derived air pollutants and cognitive as well as neurobehavioral function among children.

The community-based cross-sectional study was conducted in Cuddalore district, Tamil Nadu, India, between January 2026 and march 2026. A total of 190 were screened initially. Sample size estimation was performed using an assumed moderate effect size of 0.5, alpha level of 0.5 and statistical power of 80%. Children were recruited based on spelling and arithmetic (Teste do Desempenho Escolar) TDE subsets performance [8]. The TDE criterion was used to identify children with possible learning difficulties relevant to neurocognitive assessment. The inclusion criteria included school-aged children between 8 to 12 years, both males and females, residing near coal-fired power plant for at least 5 years, children scoring below 25th percentile on arithmetic and spelling TDE subtests, consent from anyone of the parents. The exclusion criteria included history of congenital impairment/ disorders, history of pre-mature birth and other neurological disorders. The samples were categorized into 2 groups based on the locality. Those who lived within 10 miles from coal-fired power plants taken as Group A and those who lived away from 40 miles were considered as Group B. These (10-mile and 40 mile) cut-off were selected to represent higher and lower environmental exposure zones based on regional particulate matter dispersion patterns reported in previous environmental studies. The autonomy, consent and child assent were obtained. The participants demographic details such as age, gender, home/residential address were evaluated.

The children satisfied the selection criteria were evaluated initially with TDE subsets and later, using Mini Mental state examination for children (MMS) [9] and child behavior checklist (CBCL) [10]. The air quality of the individual children locality was evaluated. The personal modular impactor was installed at representative monitoring locations within the study regions approximately one week prior to assessment to estimate ambient PM10 exposure levels [3]. Allocation was concealed. Data analyst was blinded.

Table 1 Comparison of cognitive and neurobehavioural symptoms between children residing near (Group A) and far (Group B) from coal-fired power plants

   

Crude mean (standard deviation)

Adjusteda mean (standard deviation)

Group A
(n=61)

Group B
(n=54)

P

Group A
(n=61)

Group B
(n=54)

P  

MMS score

26.8 (2.0)

32.2 (2.9)

<0.001

   

26.9 (0.3)

32.3 (0.3)

<0.001  

CBCL score

65.7 (2.0)

62.4 (3.9)

<0.001

65.8 (0.4)

62.5 (0.4)

<0.001  

MMS indicates Mini-Mental State examination for children; CBCL, Child Behaviour Checklist; Group A, those who live within 10 miles and Group B, 40 miles perimeter of the coal mines.

aData were adjusted for the age and sex of the participants.

Data were analyzed using R programming language. Descriptive statistics were summarized using mean and standard deviation. The welch two sample t-test were used to compare outcome measures between groups. A coefficient of variation was utilized to identify the consistency of the data sets. Of the 190 participants initially screened, 115 participants met the final eligibility criteria and completed all assessments (Group A = 61; Group B = 54). The remaining participants were excluded due to incomplete assessments, failure to meet eligibility criteria or withdrawal of consent. The current study focused on analyzing the cognitive function using mini mental state examination, which resulted that participants in group A 26.9 (2.0) have higher cognitive deficits compared to group B 32.3 (2.9) (P <0.001). Greater changes were found in the neuro-behavioral symptoms of group A score 65.8 (2.1) compared to group B score 62.4 (3.9) (P <0.001). The effect size, 1.1, was statistically significant (95% confidence interval, 2.1-4.5). It is hypothesized that the children who were residing near the coal emission areas will have higher susceptibility for disruption in brain development and cognitive impairment. These findings are consistent with previous international studies reporting associations between particulate matter exposure and adverse neurocognitive outcomes in children.

Several limitations should be acknowledged. Potential confounding variables such as socioeconomic status, race, school quality, family income and parental education were not evaluated. The short duration of PM10 monitoring may not accurately reflect long term exposure. However, the unequal sample sizes represent a slight limitation that could impact statistical power. Future studies involving larger populations, long-term environmental monitoring, and biomarker-based assessments are recommended to improve the accuracy of exposure estimation and cognitive evaluation. As this was a cross-sectional study, causal interpretation cannot be established. The findings of the present study suggest that children residing within 10 miles of coal-fired power plants may demonstrate poorer cognitive and neurobehavioral outcomes compared to children living farther away from these regions.

Variables  

Frequency (%)

Indication of colposcopy

 

Visual inspection of the cervix with acetic acid positive

200 (66.7)

Abnormal pap test

13 (4.3)

Human papilloma virus DNA positive

4 (1.3)

Suspicious looking cervix

14 (4.7)

Others (per vaginal discharge, post-coital bleeding)

69 (23.0)

Histopathological diagnosis

Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia 1

193 (64.3)

Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia 2

26 (8.7)

Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia 3

32 (10.7)

Invasive cervical cancer

27 (9.0)

Chronic cervicitis

17 (5.6)

Squamous metaplasia

5 (1.7)

Groups based on pre-test marks

Pretest
marks (%)

Posttest

Marks (%)

Difference in pre and post-test marks (mean improvement)

P

Didactic lecture classes

<50%

36.6 (4.8)

63.2 (9.4)

26.6

<0.001

≥50%

52.8 (4.5)

72.4 (14.9)

19.6

<0.001

Flipped classes

<50%

36.9 (4.7)

82.2 (10.8)

45.4

<0.001

≥50%

52.8 (4.6)

84.2 (10.3)

31.4

<0.001

Data presented as mean (standard deviation)

Background characteristics

Number (%)

Age at presentation (weeks)a

14.3 (9.2)

Gestational age at birth (weeks)a

37.5 (2.8)

Birth weight (grams)a

2,975.0 (825.0)

Sex

 

Male

82 (41)

Female

118 (59)

Affected side

 

Right

140 (70)

Left

54 (27)

Bilateral

6 (3)

Delivery type

 

Normal vaginal delivery

152 (76)

Instrumental delivery

40 (20)

Cesarean section

8 (4)

Place of delivery

 

Home delivery by traditional birth attendant

30 (15)

Hospital delivery by midwife

120 (60)

Hospital delivery by doctor

50 (25)

Prolonged labor

136 (68)

Presentation

 

Cephalic

144 (72)

Breech

40 (20)

Transverse

16 (8)

Shoulder dystocia

136 (68)

Maternal diabetes

40 (20)

Maternal age (years)a

27.5 (6.8)

Parity of mother

 

Primipara

156 (78)

Multipara

156 (78)

aMean (standard deviation), all others are n (%)

Background characteristics

Number (%)

Age at presentation (weeks)a

14.3 (9.2)

Gestational age at birth (weeks)a

37.5 (2.8)

Birth weight (grams)a

2,975.0 (825.0)

Sex

 

Male

82 (41)

Female

118 (59)

Affected side

 

Right

140 (70)

Left

54 (27)

Bilateral

6 (3)

Delivery type

 

Normal vaginal delivery

152 (76)

Instrumental delivery

40 (20)

Cesarean section

8 (4)

Place of delivery

 

Home delivery by traditional birth attendant

30 (15)

Hospital delivery by midwife

120 (60)

Hospital delivery by doctor

50 (25)

Prolonged labor

136 (68)

Presentation

 

Cephalic

144 (72)

Breech

40 (20)

Transverse

16 (8)

Shoulder dystocia

136 (68)

Maternal diabetes

40 (20)

Maternal age (years)a

27.5 (6.8)

Parity of mother

 

Primipara

156 (78)

Multipara

156 (78)

aMean (standard deviation), all others are n (%)

Mean escape latency of acquisition day

Groups                 

NC

SC

ColC

Pre-SwE Exp

Post-SwE Exp

Days

 

 

 

 

 

1st

26.2 (2.3)

30.6 (2.4) 

60.0 (0.0)b

43.2 (1.8)b

43.8 (1.6)b

2nd

22.6 (1.0) 

25.4 (0.6)

58.9 (0.5)b

38.6 (2.0)b

40.5 (1.2)b

3rd

14.5 (1.8) 

18.9 (0.4) 

56.5 (1.2)b

34.2 (1.9)b 

33.8 (1.0)b

4th

13.1 (1.7) 

17.5 (0.8) 

53.9 (0.7)b

35.0 (1.6)b

34.9 (1.6)b

5th

13.0 (1.2) 

15.9 (0.7) 

51.7 (2.0)b

25.9 (0.7)b 

27.7 (0.9)b

6th

12.2 (1.0) 

13.3 (0.4) 

49.5 (2.0)b

16.8 (1.1)b

16.8 (0.8)b

Average of acquisition days

5th and 6th 

12.6 (0.2)

14.6 (0.8)

50.6 (0.7)b

20.4 (2.1)a

22.4 (3.2)a

NC indicates normal control; SC, Sham control; ColC, colchicine control; SwE, swimming exercise exposure.

aP <0.05; bP <0.01.

Categories

Number (%)

Sex

 

   Male

36 (60.0)

   Female

24 (40.0)

Age in yearsa

8.8 (4.2)

Education

 

   Pre-school

20 (33.3)

   Elementary school

24 (40.0)

   Junior high school

16 (26.7)

Cancer diagnoses

 

Acute lymphoblastic leukemia

33 (55)

Retinoblastoma

5 (8.3)

Acute myeloid leukemia

4 (6.7)

Non-Hodgkins lymphoma

4 (6.7)

Osteosarcoma

3 (5)

Hepatoblastoma

2 (3.3)

Lymphoma

2 (3.3)

Neuroblastoma

2 (3.3)

Medulloblastoma

1 (1.7)

Neurofibroma

1 (1.7)

Ovarian tumour

1 (1.7)

Pancreatic cancer

1 (1.7)

Rhabdomyosarcoma

1 (1.7)

aMean (standard deviation)

Test results

Disease

Sensitivity (%)

Specificity (%)

PPV (%)

NPV (%)

Yes

No

Reid’s score ≥ 5

Positive

10

15

37.0

94.5

40.1

93.8

Negative

17

258

 

 

 

 

Swede score ≥ 5

Positive

20

150

74.1

45.0

11.8

94.6

Negative

7

123

 

 

 

 

Swede score ≥ 8

Positive

3

21

11.1

92.3

12.5

91.3

Negative

24

252

 

 

 

 

High-grade indicates a score of ≥5 in both tests; PPV indicates positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value

Test

Sensitivity (%)

Specificity (%)

Positive predictive value (%)

Negative predictive value (%)

Reid’s score ≥ 5

37.0

94.5

40.0

93.8

Swede score ≥ 5

74.1

45

11.8

94.6

Swede score ≥ 8

11.1

92.3

12.5

91.3

Test

Sensitivity (%)

Specificity (%)

Positive predictive value (%)

Negative predictive value (%)

Reid’s score ≥ 5

37.0

94.5

40.0

93.8

Swede score ≥ 5

74.1

45

11.8

94.6

Swede score ≥ 8

11.1

92.3

12.5

91.3

Narakas classification

Total

200 (100%)

Grade 1

72 (36%)

Grade 2

64 (32%)

Grade 3

50 (25%)

Grade 4

14 (7%)

Complete recoverya

107 (54)

60 (83)

40 (63)

7 (14)

-

Near complete functional recovery but partial deformitya

22 (11)

5 (7)

10 (16)

6 (12)

1 (7)

Partial recovery with gross functional defect    and deformity

31 (16)

7 (10)

13 (20)

10 (20)

1 (7)

No significant improvement 

40 (20)

-

1 (1.5)

27 (54)

12 (86)

aSatisfactory recovery

bGrade 1, C5, 6, 7 improvement; Grade 2, C5, 6, 7 improvement; Grade 3, panpalsy C5, 6, 7, 8, 9, Grade 4, panpalsy with Hornon’s syndrome.

Narakas classification

Total

200 (100%)

Grade-1

72 (36%)

Grade-2

64 (32%)

Grade-3

50 (25%)

Grade-4

14 (7%)

Complete recoverya

107 (54)

60 (83)

40 (63)

7 (14)

-

Near complete functional recovery but partial deformitya

22 (11)

5 (7)

10 (16)

6 (12)

1 (7)

Partial recovery with gross functional defect    and deformity

31 (16)

7 (10)

13 (20)

10 (20)

1 (7)

No significant improvement 

40 (20)

-

1 (1.5)

27 (54)

12 (86)

aSatisfactory recovery

bGrade 1, C5, 6, 7 improvement; Grade 2, C5, 6, 7 improvement; Grade 3, panpalsy C5, 6, 7,8,9, Grade 4, panpalsy with Hornon’s syndrome.

Variables in probe trial day

Groups

NC

SC

ColC

Pre-SwE Exp

Post-SwE Exp

Target crossings

8.0 (0.3)

7.3 (0.3) 

1.7 (0.2)a

6.0 (0.3)a

5.8 (0.4)a

Time spent in target

18.0 (0.4) 

16.2 (0.7) 

5.8 (0.8)a

15.3 (0.7)a

15.2 (0.9)a

NC indicates normal control; SC, Sham control; ColC, colchicine control; SwE, swimming exercise exposure.

aP <0.01.

Pain level

Number (%)

P

Pre

Post 1

Post 2

Mean (SD)a pain score

4.7 (1.9)

2.7 (1.6)

0.8 (1.1)

<0.001

Pain categories

    

   No pain (0)

-

(1.7)

31 (51.7)

<0.001

   Mild pain (1-3)

15 (25.0)

43 (70.0)

27 (45.0)

 

   Moderete pain (4-6)

37 (61.7)

15 (25.0)

2 (3.3)

 

   Severe pain (7-10)

8 (13.3)

2 (3.3)

-

 

aPain scores according to the visual analogue scale ranging from 0 to 10; SD indicates standard deviation

Surgeries

Number  

(%)

Satisfactory outcomes n (%)

Primary surgery (n=24)

 

 

Upper plexus

6 (25)

5 (83)

Pan-palsy

18 (75)

6 (33)

All

24 (100)

11 (46)

Secondary Surgery (n=26)

 

 

Shoulder deformity

15 (58)

13 (87)

Wrist and forearm deformity

11 (42)

6 (54)

All

26 (100)

19 (73)

Primary and secondary surgery

50 (100)

30 (60)

Mallet score 14 to 25 or Raimondi score 2-3 or Medical Research grading >3 to 5.

Narakas classification

Total

200 (100%)

Grade-1

72 (36%)

Grade-2

64 (32%)

Grade-3

50 (25%)

Grade-4

14 (7%)

Complete recoverya

107 (54)

60 (83)

40 (63)

7 (14)

-

Near complete functional recovery but partial deformitya

22 (11)

5 (7)

10 (16)

6 (12)

1 (7)

Partial recovery with gross functional defect    and deformity

31 (16)

7 (10)

13 (20)

10 (20)

1 (7)

No significant improvement 

40 (20)

-

1 (1.5)

27 (54)

12 (86)

aSatisfactory recovery

bGrade 1, C5, 6, 7 improvement; Grade 2, C5, 6, 7 improvement; Grade 3, panpalsy C5, 6, 7,8,9, Grade 4, panpalsy with Hornon’s syndrome.

Trials

Groups

NC

SC

ColC

Pre-SwE Exp

Post-SwE Exp

1

20.8 (0.6)

22.1 (1.8)

41.1 (1.3)b

31.9 (1.9)b

32.9 (1.8)a, b

2

10.9 (0.6)

14.9 (1.7)

37.4 (1.1)b

24.9 (2.0)b

26.8 (2.5)b

3

8.4 (0.5)

9.9 (2.0)

32.8 (1.2)b

22.0 (1.4)b

21.0 (1.4)b

4

7.8 (0.5)

10.4 (1.3)

27.6(1.1)b

12.8 (1.2)b

13.0 (1.4)b

Savings (%)c

47.7 (3.0)

33.0 (3.0)

10.0 (0.9)b

23.6 (2.7)b

18.9 (5.3)b

NC indicates normal control; SC, Sham control; ColC, colchicine control; SwE, swimming exercise exposure.

aP <0.05; bP <0.01.

cThe difference in latency scores between trials 1 and 2, expressed as the percentage of savings increased from trial 1 to trial 2

 Lesion-size

Histopathology report

Total

CIN1

CIN2

CIN3

ICC

CC

SM

0–5 mm

73

0

0

0

5

5

83

6–15 mm

119

18

1

4

0

0

142

>15 mm

1

8

31

23

12

0

75

Total

193

26

32

27

17

5

300

CIN indicates cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; ICC, invasive cervical cancer; CC, chronic cervicitis; SM, squamous metaplasia

 

Histopathology report

Total

CIN1

CIN2

CIN3

ICC

CC

SM

Lesion -Size

0-5  mm

73

0

0

0

5

5

83

6-15  mm

119

18

1

4

0

0

142

>15  mm

1

8

31

23

12

0

75

Total

193

26

32

27

17

5

300

CIN indicates Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; ICC, Invasive cervical cancer; CC, Chronic cervicitis; SM, Squamous metaplasia

Group

Didactic posttest marks (%)

Flipped posttest marks (%)

Difference in marks (mean improvement)

P

<50%

63.2 (9.4)

82.2 (10.8)

19.0

<0.001

≥50%

72.4 (14.9)

84.2 ( 10.3)

11.8

<0.001

Data presented as mean (standard deviation)

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the management and faculty of school of physiotherapy, Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth, Puducherry for their continuous support. Special thanks are extended to the children and their parents for their active participation and co-operation.
Author contributions
Manuscript drafting and revising it critically: HS. Approval of the final version of the manuscript: HS, SKK, GN, SE. Guarantor of accuracy and integrity of the work: GN, SE.
Conflict of interest
We do not have any conflict of interest.
Data availability statement
We confirm that the data supporting the findings of the study will be shared upon reasonable request.
AI disclosure
AI tool was used for grammar correction and language improvement; however, all interpretations, conclusions and final drafting were independently verified by the authors.
Supplementary file
None
    References
    1. Cohen AJ, Brauer M, Burnett R, Anderson HR, Frostad J, Estep K, Balakrishnan K, Brunekreef B, Dandona L, Dandona R, Feigin V. Estimates and 25-year trends of the global burden of disease attributable to ambient air pollution: an analysis of data from the Global Burden of Diseases Study 2015. The lancet. 2017 May 13;389(10082):1907-18. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30505-6
    2. Rumchev K, Van Hoang D, Lee AH. Exposure to dust and respiratory health among Australian miners. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health. 2023 Apr;96(3):355-63. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-023-01957-w
    3. Sears CG, Sears L, Zierold KM. Sex differences in the association between exposure to indoor particulate matter and cognitive control among children (age 6–14 years) living near coal-fired power plants. Neurotoxicology and teratology. 2020 Mar 1;78:106855.  doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ntt.2020.106855
    4. Verma C, Madan S, Hussain A. Heavy metal contamination of groundwater due to fly ash disposal of coal-fired thermal power plant, Parichha, Jhansi, India. Cogent Engineering. 2016 Dec 31;3(1):1179243. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2016.1179243
    5. Tönnies E, Trushina E. Oxidative stress, synaptic dysfunction, and Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Alzheimer’s disease. 2017 Apr 19;57(4):1105-1121. doi: https://doi.org/10.3233/JAD-161088
    6. Harvey PD. Domains of cognition and their assessment. Dialogues in clinical neuroscience. 2019 Sep 30;21(3):227-237. doi: https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2019.21.3/pharvey
    7. Sears CG, Zierold KM. Health of children living near coal ash. Global pediatric health. 2017 Jul 17;4:2333794X17720330. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/2333794X17720330
    8. Oliveira-Ferreira F, Costa DS, Micheli LR, Oliveira LD, Pinheiro-Chagas P, Haase VG. School Achievement Test: Normative data for a representative sample of elementary school children. Psychology & Neuroscience. 2012 Dec;5(2):157-164. doi: https://doi.org/10.3922/j.psns.2012.2.05
    9. Salvador LD, Moura R, Ferreira FO, Andrade PM, Carvalho MR, Haase VG. The Mini-Mental Examination for Children (MMC): Evidence of validity for children with learning difficulties. Dementia & Neuropsychologia. 2019 Dec 9;13(4):427-435. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-57642018dn13-040010
    10. Achenbach TM, Edelbrock C. Child behavior checklist. Burlington (vt). 1991;7(622):371-392. Available at: https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=2549727. [Accessed on 7 June 2026]