Beating the heat: development and evaluation of a Canadian hot weather health-response plan.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An increasing number of cities subject to hazardous summer weather in the United States and Canada have begun to develop and implement hot weather response plans to prevent heat-related illnesses and deaths. In this study we focus on heat-mortality relationships in Toronto, Ontario, between 1980 and 1996 and evaluate the potential effectiveness of the city's interim hot weather-health response plan. Using two heat stress indexes--humidex and apparent temperature--we identified excess mortality associated with hot and humid weather and then estimated excess deaths for hot and cool summers. Mortality rates for all ages and for > 64 years age groups rose with increasing humidex and apparent temperature, with no significant increase for the population < 65 years. Excess mortality occurred as low as the 30-35 degrees C humidex range, which is below the 40 degrees C humidex used to issue a heat warning under Toronto's interim hot weather response plan. During a hot summer (such as 1988 or 1995), 32 excess deaths would be expected, whereas 34 fewer deaths than baseline levels would be expected during a cool summer like 1982 or 1992. Days with high humidex levels occur infrequently in Toronto, and thus exposure is limited under current climatic conditions. In the event of a warming climate, more days with dangerously high humidex levels are likely to occur, and summer deaths are expected to increase. Toronto's hot weather health-response plan is an important early step for adaptation to climate change.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".