Mortality-Air Pollution Associations in Low Exposure Environments (MAPLE): Phase 2.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: ) observed throughout Canada. METHODS: . Both existing and targeted ground-based measurements were analyzed to develop improved exposure data sets for subsequent epidemiological analyses. exposures for subjects whose ages ranged from 25 to 90 years. About 8.5 million were from three Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohort (CanCHEC) analytic files and another 540,900 were Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) participants. Mortality was linked through the year 2016. Hazard ratios (HR) were estimated with Cox Proportional Hazard models using a 3-year moving average exposure with a 1-year lag, with the year of follow-up as the time axis. All models were stratified by 5-year age groups, sex, and immigrant status. Covariates were based on directed acyclical graphs (DAG), and included contextual variables (airshed, community size, neighborhood dependence, neighborhood deprivation, ethnic concentration, neighborhood instability, and urban form). A second model was examined including the DAG-based covariates as well as all subject-level risk factors (income, education, marital status, indigenous identity, employment status, occupational class, and visible minority status) available in each cohort. Additional subject-level behavioral covariates (fruit and vegetable consumption, leisure exercise frequency, alcohol consumption, smoking, and body mass index [BMI]) were included in the CCHS analysis. -mortality association was examined by first fitting restricted cubic splines (RCS) with a large number of knots and then fitting the shape-constrained health impact function (SCHIF) to the RCS predictions and their standard errors (SE). This method provides graphical results indicating the RCS predictions, as a nonparametric means of characterizing the concentration-response relationship in detail and the resulting mean SCHIF and accompanying uncertainty as a parametric summary. and these covariates within the CCHS. RESULTS: ) were similar for the 1991 (1.041, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.016-1.066) and 1996 (1.041, 1.024-1.059) CanCHEC cohorts with a larger estimate observed for the 2001 cohort (1.084, 1.060-1.108). The pooled cohort HR estimate was 1.053 (1.041-1.065). In the CCHS an analogous model indicated a HR of 1.13 (95% CI: 1.06-1.21), which was reduced slightly with the addition of behavioral covariates (1.11, 1.04-1.18). In each of the CanCHEC cohorts, the RCS increased rapidly over lower concentrations, slightly declining between the 25th and 75th percentiles and then increasing beyond the 75th percentile. The steepness of the increase in the RCS over lower concentrations diminished as the cohort start date increased. The SCHIFs displayed a supralinear association in each of the three CanCHEC cohorts and in the CCHS cohort. was similar to or larger than that for nonimmigrants, with differences between immigrants and nonimmigrants decreasing in the more recent cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: . This relationship was supralinear with no apparent threshold or sublinear association.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».