Modelling the variation of land surface temperature as determinant of risk of heat-related health events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The evaluation of exposure to ambient temperatures in epidemiological studies has generally been based on records from meteorological stations which may not adequately represent local temperature variability. Here we propose a spatially explicit model to estimate local exposure to temperatures of large populations under various meteorological conditions based on satellite and meteorological data. METHODS: A general linear model was used to estimate surface temperatures using 15 LANDSAT 5 and LANDSAT 7 images for Quebec Province, Canada between 1987 and 2002 and spanning the months of June to August. The images encompassed both rural and urban landscapes and predictors included: meteorological records of temperature and wind speed, distance to major water bodies, Normalized Differential Vegetation Index (NDVI), land cover (built and bare land, water, or vegetation), latitude, longitude, and week of the year. RESULTS: The model explained 77% of the variance in surface temperature, accounting for both temporal and spatial variations. The standard error of estimates was 1.42°C. Land cover and NDVI were strong predictors of surface temperature. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that a statistical approach to estimating surface temperature incorporating both spatially explicit satellite data and time-varying meteorological data may be relevant to assessing exposure to heat during the warm season in the Quebec. By allowing the estimation of space- and time-specific surface temperatures, this model may also be used to assess the possible impacts of land use changes under various meteorological conditions. It can be applied to assess heat exposure within a large population and at relatively fine-grained scale. It may be used to evaluate the acute health effect of heat exposure over long time frames. The method proposed here could be replicated in other areas around the globe for which satellite data and meteorological data is available.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".