MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289648021 · doi:10.3390/ijerph13020168

Association between Floods and Acute Cardiovascular Diseases: A Population-Based Cohort Study Using a Geographic Information System Approach

2016· article· en· W2289648021 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alain Vanasse, Alan A. Cohen, Josiane Courteau, Patrick Bergeron, Roxanne Dault, Pierre Gosselin, Claudia Blais, Diane Bélanger, Louis Rochette, Fateh Chebana

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecBishop's UniversityCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLogistic regressionPopulationOdds ratioCohortOddsEnvironmental healthDemographyCohort studyDiseaseFlood mythGeographyPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Floods represent a serious threat to human health beyond the immediate risk of drowning. There is few data on the potential link between floods and direct consequences on health such as on cardiovascular health. This study aimed to explore the impact of one of the worst floods in the history of Quebec, Canada on acute cardiovascular diseases (CVD). METHODS: A cohort study with a time series design with multiple control groups was built with the adult population identified in the Quebec Integrated Chronic Disease Surveillance System. A geographic information system approach was used to define the study areas. Logistic regressions were performed to compare the occurrence of CVD between groups. RESULTS: The results showed a 25%-27% increase in the odds in the flooded population in spring 2011 when compared with the population in the same area in springs 2010 and 2012. Besides, an increase up to 69% was observed in individuals with a medical history of CVD. CONCLUSION: Despite interesting results, the association was not statistically significant. A possible explanation to this result can be that the population affected by the flood was probably too small to provide the statistical power to answer the question, and leaves open a substantial possibility for a real and large effect.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations32
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207