Here is an abstract from a study we have previously seen.

"Ambient (outdoor) air pollution is a key risk factor for health for

which effective policy plays an important preventative role. Australian

federal and related state air quality standards have historically relied

on international evidence for guidance, which may not accurately

reflect the Australian context. However, there has been a large increase

in Australian epidemiological studies over recent years. The aim of

this study is to provide an updated systematic literature review of

peer-reviewed epidemiological studies that examined the health impacts

of outdoor air pollution in Australia, including short- and long-term

exposure. Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic

literature review. Broad search terms were applied to two databases

(PubMed and Web of Science) and Google Scholar. Quality assessment and

risk of bias were assessed using standard metrics. Included studies were

summarised by tabulating key study characteristics, grouped by health

outcomes. In total, 72 studies were included in the review. Sixty-four

(89%) studies used daily or hourly pollutant concentrations to examine

short-term exposure impacts, of which 59 (92%) revealed significant

associations with one or more health outcomes, including

cardio-respiratory, all-cause mortality or morbidity and birth outcomes.

Eight (11%) studies used annual average pollutant concentrations to

investigate the long-term exposure finding significant associations with

asthma, reduced lung function, atopy and cardio-respiratory mortality

across five studies. The remaining three studies found no significant

association with asthma, mortality and a range of self-reported

diseases, respectively. Ambient air pollution has substantial health

impacts in Australia. The body of domestic evidence has increased

markedly since national air quality standards were first set in the

1990s, which could be drawn on by policy-makers when revising the

existing standards, or considering new standards."

>> Link to original source.

What changes need to be made to this information to make it more accessible to interested non-specialist audiences? (Choose all that apply).