Relationships Between Fine Particulate Air Pollution, Cardiometabolic Disorders, and Cardiovascular Mortality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Growing evidence suggests that long-term exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) air pollution contributes to risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. There is uncertainty about who are most susceptible. Individuals with underlying cardiometabolic disorders, including hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and obesity, may be at greater risk. PM2.5 pollution may also contribute to cardiometabolic disorders, augmenting CVD risk. OBJECTIVE: This analysis evaluates relationships between long-term PM2.5 exposure and cardiometabolic disease on risk of death from CVD and cardiometabolic conditions. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data on 669 046 participants from the American Cancer Society Cancer Prevention Study II cohort were linked to modeled PM2.5 concentrations at geocoded home addresses. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate adjusted hazards ratios for death from CVD and cardiometabolic diseases based on death-certificate information. Effect modification by pre-existing cardiometabolic risk factors on the PM2.5-CVD mortality association was examined. PM2.5 exposure was associated with CVD mortality, with the hazards ratios (95% confidence interval) per 10 μg/m(3) increase in PM2.5 equal to 1.12 (1.10-1.15). Deaths linked to hypertension and diabetes mellitus (mentioned on death certificate as either primary or contributing cause of death) were also associated with PM2.5. There was no consistent evidence of effect modification by cardiometabolic disease risk factors on the PM2.5-CVD mortality association. CONCLUSIONS: Pollution-induced CVD mortality risk is observed for those with and without existing cardiometabolic disorders. Long-term exposure may also contribute to the development or exacerbation of cardiometabolic disorders, increasing risk of CVD, and cardiometabolic disease mortality.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".