Estimating long-term pollution exposure effects through inverse probability weighting methods with Cox proportional hazards models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) is associated with negative health outcomes in both the short and long term. However, the cohort studies that have produced many of the estimates of long-term exposure associations may fail to account for selection bias in pollution exposure as well as covariate imbalance in the study population; therefore, causal modeling techniques may be beneficial. Methods: Twenty-nine years of data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) was compiled and linked to modeled annual average outdoor PM 2.5 concentration and restricted-use mortality data. A series of Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted using inverse probability weights, yielded causal risk estimates of long-term exposure to ambient PM 2.5 on all-cause and cardiopulmonary mortality. Results: Covariate-adjusted estimated relative risks per 10 μg/m 3 increase in PM 2.5 exposure were estimated to be 1.117 (1.083, 1.152) for all-cause mortality and 1.232 (1.174, 1.292) for cardiopulmonary mortality. Inverse probability weighted Cox models provide relatively consistent and robust estimates similar to those in the unweighted baseline multivariate Cox model, though they have marginally lower point estimates and higher standard errors. Conclusions: These results provide evidence that long-term exposure to PM 2.5 contributes to increased mortality risk in US adults and that the estimated effects are generally robust to modeling choices. The size and robustness of estimated associations highlight the importance of clean air as a matter of public health. Estimated confounding due to measured covariates appears minimal in the NHIS cohort, and various distributional assumptions have little bearing on the magnitude or standard errors of estimated causal associations.
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 | 0.030 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".