MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051823606 · doi:10.1289/ehp.01109s3419

Assessing the health benefits of urban air pollution reductions associated with climate change mitigation (2000-2020): Santiago, São Paulo, México City, and New York City.

2001· article· en· W2051823606 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Luis A. Cifuentes, Víctor Hugo Borja‐Aburto, Nélson Gouveia, George Thurston, Devra Lee Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Health Perspectives · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Renewable Energy LaboratoryNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesYork UniversityCarnegie Mellon UniversityU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyU.S. Department of EnergyWorld Bank GroupSchool of Medicine, New York UniversityRockefeller Family FundNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAir pollutionGreenhouse gasEnvironmental healthPublic healthFossil fuelEnvironmental protectionParticulatesClimate changeEnvironmental scienceNatural resource economicsGeographyMedicineWaste managementEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To investigate the potential local health benefits of adopting greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation policies, we develop scenarios of GHG mitigation for México City, México; Santiago, Chile; São Paulo, Brazil; and New York, New York, USA using air pollution health impact factors appropriate to each city. We estimate that the adoption of readily available technologies to lessen fossil fuel emissions over the next two decades in these four cities alone will reduce particulate matter and ozone and avoid approximately 64,000 (95% confidence interval [CI] 18,000-116,000) premature deaths (including infant deaths), 65,000 (95% CI 22,000-108,000) chronic bronchitis cases, and 46 million (95% CI 35-58 million) person-days of work loss or other restricted activity. These findings illustrate that GHG mitigation can provide considerable local air pollution-related public health benefits to countries that choose to abate GHG emissions by reducing fossil fuel combustion.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.261 · 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.

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

Citations129
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Health PerspectivesSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207