Air Pollution and Emergency Department Visits for Hypertension in Edmonton and Calgary, Canada: A Case-Crossover Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ambient air pollutant exposures have been associated with a wide variety of cardiovascular events; however, few studies have evaluated their impact upon acute emergency department (ED) visits for hypertension. METHODS: The purpose of this study was to examine the associations between ED visits for hypertension and ambient air pollution concentrations among 6,532 patients during the period of January 2010 to December 2011 in Edmonton and Calgary, Alberta, Canada. The associations were evaluated using a case-crossover design. RESULTS: Odds ratios and their 95% confidence interval have been calculated for 1 unit increase in their interquartile range for lags (the time between air pollutant measurement and exposure-response) 0-8 days. During the cold season, statistically significant positive results were observed for SO2 among lag days 4-6 and 8 for females and lag days 5 and 6 for males. Moreover, statistically significant positive results were observed for NO2 on lag day 7 for females and for PM2.5 on lag days 5 and 7, for females and lag day 6 for males. During the warm season, statistically significant positive results were observed for O3 on lag days 3 and 4 and for SO2 on lag days 2 and 8 for females. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the hypothesis that recent exposures to ambient levels of several air pollutants can be capable of elevating blood pressure to a clinically significant extent such that it leads to ED visits for hypertension.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".