Residential exposure to outdoor air pollution and adult lung function, with focus on small airway obstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although a growing body of evidence suggests that chronic exposure to outdoor air pollution is linked to a decline in lung function, data on flow at low lung volumes that may be more specific of small airway obstruction are still scarce. We aimed to study the associations between residential exposure to air pollution and lung function, with specific focus on small airways obstruction. We assessed 2995 French participants (aged between 40 and 65) in the ELISABET cross-sectional survey. Residential exposures to nitrogen dioxide (NO2), particulate matter with a diameter <10 μm (PM10) and sulphur dioxide (SO2) were assessed. The spirometric parameters were forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), and forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of FVC (FEF25-75) and at 75% of FVC (FEF75). Coefficients in linear regression models were expressed as the z-score [95% confidence interval] for an increment of 5 μg/m3 in NO2 and 2 μg/m3 in PM10 and SO2. NO2 was associated with significantly lower values of FEV1 (−0.10 [-0.15;-0.05]), FVC (−0.06 [-0.11;-0.02]), FEV1/FVC (−0.07 [-0.11;-0.03]), FEF25-75 (−0.09 [-0.14;-0.05]) and FEF75 (−0.08 [-0.12;-0.04]). PM10 was associated with significantly lower values of FEV1 (−0.10 [-0.15;-0.04]), FVC (−0.06 [-0.11;-0.01]), FEV1/FVC (−0.06 [‒0.11;-0.01]), FEF25-75 (−0.08 [-0.13;-0.03]) and FEF75 (−0.08 [-0.12;-0.04]). SO2 was associated with significantly lower values of FEV1 (−0.09 [-0.16;-0.02]), FEV1/FVC (−0.07 [-0.13;-0.01]), FEF25-75 (−0.09 [-0.15;-0.02]) and FEF75 (−0.08 [-0.14;-0.03]) but not FVC (−0.05 [-0.11; 0.009]). Even though spatial variations in pollutant levels were low, residential exposure to outdoor air pollution was associated with lower lung function, including lower FEF25-75 and FEF75 suggesting small airway obstruction.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".