MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027022739 · doi:10.1111/1539-6924.00282

Exposure Misclassification and Threshold Concentrations in Time Series Analyses of Air Pollution Health Effects

2002· article· en· W2027022739 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Bräuer, Jochen Brumm, Sverre Vedal, A. John Petkau

Bibliographic record

VenueRisk Analysis · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationThreshold limit valueStatisticsAir pollutionEnvironmental healthSample (material)Exposure assessmentEnvironmental scienceMedicineMathematicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Linear, no-threshold relationships are typically reported for time series studies of air pollution and mortality. Since regulatory standards and economic valuations typically assume some threshold level, we evaluated the fundamental question of the impact of exposure misclassification on the persistence of underlying personal-level thresholds when personal data are aggregated to the population level in the assessment of exposure-response relationships. As an example, we measured personal exposures to two particle metrics, PM2.5 and sulfate (SO4(2-)), for a sample of lung disease patients and compared these with exposures estimated from ambient measurements Previous work has shown that ambient:personal correlations for PM2.5 are much lower than for SO4(2-), suggesting that ambient PM2.5 measurements misclassify exposures to PM2.5. We then developed a method by which the measured:estimated exposure relationships for these patients were used to simulate personal exposures for a larger population and then to estimate individual-level mortality risks under different threshold assumptions. These individual risks were combined to obtain the population risk of death, thereby exhibiting the prominence (and the value) of the threshold in the relationship between risk and estimated exposure. Our results indicated that for poorly classified exposures (PM2.5 in this example) population-level thresholds were apparent at lower ambient concentrations than specified common personal thresholds, while for well-classified exposures (e.g., SO4(2-)), the apparent thresholds were similar to these underlying personal thresholds. These results demonstrate that surrogate metrics that are not highly correlated with personal exposures obscure the presence of thresholds in epidemiological studies of larger populations, while exposure indicators that are highly correlated with personal exposures can accurately reflect underlying personal thresholds.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.044
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.129
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0440.129
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations51
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRisk AnalysisSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207