MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126007894 · doi:10.1093/aje/kwh181

Traffic Air Pollution and Mortality Rate Advancement Periods

2004· article· en· W2126007894 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Murray M. Finkelstein, Michael Jerrett, Malcolm R. Sears

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Epidemiology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalRelative riskDiabetes mellitusDemographyPopulationMortality rateEnvironmental healthResidenceBody mass indexRate ratioInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic exposure to air pollution is associated with increased mortality rates. The impact of air pollution relative to other causes of death in a population is of public health importance and has not been well established. In this study, the rate advancement periods associated with traffic pollution exposures were estimated. Study subjects underwent pulmonary function testing at a clinic in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, between 1985 and 1999. Cox regression was used to model mortality from all natural causes during 1992-2001 in relation to lung function, body mass index, a diagnosis of chronic pulmonary disease, chronic ischemic heart disease, or diabetes mellitus, household income, and residence within 50 m of a major urban road or within 100 m of a highway. Subjects living close to a major road had an increased risk of mortality (relative risk = 1.18, 95% confidence interval: 1.02, 1.38). The mortality rate advancement period associated with residence near a major road was 2.5 years (95% confidence interval: 0.2, 4.8). By comparison, the rate advancement periods attributable to chronic pulmonary disease, chronic ischemic heart disease, and diabetes were 3.4 years, 3.1 years, and 4.4 years, respectively.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 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

Citations239
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of EpidemiologySame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207