ASSOCIATION BETWEEN PARTICULATE- AND GAS-PHASE COMPONENTS OF URBAN AIR POLLUTION AND DAILY MORTALITY IN EIGHT CANADIAN CITIES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although some consensus has emerged among the scientific and regulatory communities that the urban ambient atmospheric mix of combustion related pollutants is a determinant of population health, the relative toxicity of the chemical and physical components of this complex mixture remains unclear. Daily mortality rates and concurrent data on size-fractionated particulate mass and gaseous pollutants were obtained in eight of Canada's largest cities from 1986 to 1996 inclusive in order to examine the relative toxicity of the components of the mixture of ambient air pollutants to which Canadians are exposed. Positive and statistically significant associations were observed between daily variations in both gas- and particulate-phase pollution and daily fluctuations in mortality rates. The association between air pollution and mortality could not be explained by temporal variation in either mortality rates or weather factors. Fine particulate mass (less than 2.5 microns in average aerometric diameter) was a stronger predictor of mortality than coarse mass (between 2.5 and 10 microns). Size-fractionated particulate mass explained 28% of the total health effect of the mixture, with the remaining effects accounted for by the gases. Forty-seven elemental concentrations were obtained for the fine and coarse fraction using nondestructive x-ray fluorescence techniques. Sulfate concentrations were obtained by ion chromatography. Sulfate ion, iron, nickel, and zinc from the fine fraction were most strongly associated with mortality. The total effect of these four components was greater than that for fine mass alone, suggesting that the characteristics of the complex chemical mixture in the fine fraction may be a better predictor of mortality than mass alone. However, the variation in the effects of the constituents of the fine fraction between cities was greater than the variation in the mass effect, implying that there are additional toxic components of fine particulate matter not examined in this study whose concentrations and effects vary between locations. One of these components, carbon, represents half the mass of fine particulate matter. We recommend that measurements of elemental and organic carbon be undertaken in Canadian urban environments to examine their potential effects on human health.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".