Hospitalizations from Hypertensive Diseases, Diabetes, and Arrhythmia in Relation to Low and High Temperatures: Population-Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little is known about the extent to which ambient temperatures contribute to the burden of hospitalizations from hypertensive diseases, diabetes, and arrhythmia. To fill this knowledge gap, we conducted a time-series study comprising entire population of Ontario, Canada during 1996-2013. A distributed lag non-linear model was developed to estimate the cumulative effect of temperatures over a 21-day lag period. We computed the burden of hospitalizations attributable to cold and heat. Furthermore, we separated the burden into components related to mild and extreme temperatures. Compared to the temperature with minimum risk of morbidity, cold temperatures (1(st) percentile) were associated with a 37% (95% confidence interval: 5%, 78%) increase in hypertension-related hospitalizations whereas no significant association with hot temperatures (99(th) percentile) was observed. Cold and hot temperatures were also associated with a 12% (1%, 24%) and a 30% (6%, 58%) increase in diabetes-related hospitalizations, respectively. Arrhythmia was not linked to temperatures. These estimates translate into ~10% of hypertension-related hospitalizations attributable to total cold, and ~9% from mild cold. Similarly, ~11% of diabetes-related hospitalizations were due to total heat, virtually all of which were from mild heat. In conclusion, ambient temperatures, especially in moderate ranges, contribute to excess hospitalizations from hypertension and diabetes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".