A systematic review of data mining and machine learning for air pollution epidemiology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Data measuring airborne pollutants, public health and environmental factors are increasingly being stored and merged. These big datasets offer great potential, but also challenge traditional epidemiological methods. This has motivated the exploration of alternative methods to make predictions, find patterns and extract information. To this end, data mining and machine learning algorithms are increasingly being applied to air pollution epidemiology. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review on the application of data mining and machine learning methods in air pollution epidemiology. We carried out our search process in PubMed, the MEDLINE database and Google Scholar. Research articles applying data mining and machine learning methods to air pollution epidemiology were queried and reviewed. RESULTS: Our search queries resulted in 400 research articles. Our fine-grained analysis employed our inclusion/exclusion criteria to reduce the results to 47 articles, which we separate into three primary areas of interest: 1) source apportionment; 2) forecasting/prediction of air pollution/quality or exposure; and 3) generating hypotheses. Early applications had a preference for artificial neural networks. In more recent work, decision trees, support vector machines, k-means clustering and the APRIORI algorithm have been widely applied. Our survey shows that the majority of the research has been conducted in Europe, China and the USA, and that data mining is becoming an increasingly common tool in environmental health. For potential new directions, we have identified that deep learning and geo-spacial pattern mining are two burgeoning areas of data mining that have good potential for future applications in air pollution epidemiology. CONCLUSIONS: We carried out a systematic review identifying the current trends, challenges and new directions to explore in the application of data mining methods to air pollution epidemiology. This work shows that data mining is increasingly being applied in air pollution epidemiology. The potential to support air pollution epidemiology continues to grow with advancements in data mining related to temporal and geo-spacial mining, and deep learning. This is further supported by new sensors and storage mediums that enable larger, better quality data. This suggests that many more fruitful applications can be expected in the future.
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 | 0.018 | 0.084 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.021 | 0.021 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".