MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1931712468 · doi:10.2478/v10001-006-0032-7

Use of Generalized Linear Mixed Models to Examine the Association between Air Pollution and Health Outcomes

2006· article· en· W1931712468 on OpenAlexaff
Mieczysław Szyszkowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandom effects modelPoisson distributionGeneralized linear mixed modelGeneralized linear modelGeneralized additive modelAir pollutionStatisticsCrossoverPoisson regressionAssociation (psychology)Multilevel modelMixed modelMathematicsEnvironmental healthMedicineComputer sciencePsychologyEcologyMachine learningMeta-analysisPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Time-series and case-crossover are two techniques that are widely used for assessing the short-term impact of ambient air pollution exposure on health. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) methodology is proposed here to study the association between ambient air pollution and health outcomes. Poisson random-effects models are applied to analyze the clustered counts, where the groups of days, determined by the triplet <day of week, month, year>, form the clusters. The proposed technique uses a nested structure for the clusters and allows random-effects for hierarchical factors. A random intercept in the models adjusts for different levels of counts among the clusters. A fixed slope represents a common response to the exposure. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The obtained results are consistent with those generated by a classical approach (for example the case-crossover technique). The GLMM technique is a valid alternative methodology for studying air health effects.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.786

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.162
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations59
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental HealthSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207