Long-Term Fine Particulate Matter Exposure and Mortality From Diabetes in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Recent studies suggest that chronic exposure to air pollution can promote the development of diabetes. However, whether this relationship actually translates into an increased risk of mortality attributable to diabetes is uncertain. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We evaluated the association between long-term exposure to ambient fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and diabetes-related mortality in a prospective cohort analysis of 2.1 million adults from the 1991 Canadian census mortality follow-up study. Mortality information, including ∼5,200 deaths coded as diabetes being the underlying cause, was ascertained by linkage to the Canadian Mortality Database from 1991 to 2001. Subject-level estimates of long-term exposure to PM2.5 were derived from satellite observations. The hazard ratios (HRs) for diabetes-related mortality were related to PM2.5 and adjusted for individual-level and contextual variables using Cox proportional hazards survival models. RESULTS: Mean PM2.5 exposure levels for the entire population were low (8.7 µg/m3; SD, 3.9 µg/m3; interquartile range, 6.2 µg/m3). In fully adjusted models, a 10-µg/m3 elevation in PM2.5 exposure was associated with an increase in risk for diabetes-related mortality (HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.37-1.62). The monotonic change in risk to the population persisted to PM2.5 concentration<5 µg/m3. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term exposure to PM2.5, even at low levels, is related to an increased risk of mortality attributable to diabetes. These findings have considerable public health importance given the billions of people exposed to air pollution and the worldwide growing epidemic of diabetes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".