MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3024450993

Exposure to fine particulate matter air pollution in Canada.

2017· article· en· W3024450993 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lauren Pinault, Aaron van Donkelaar, Randall V. Martin

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusResidenceImmigrationGeographyDemographyPopulationEnvironmental healthParticulatesSocioeconomicsMedicineSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Exposure to ambient fine particulate matter (PM2.5) has been associated with a greater risk of non-accidental, cardiovascular and respiratory mortality in Canada. Research based on Canadian cohorts suggests that exposure to PM2.5 varies by demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Studies of NO₂, another pollutant, indicate that persons of lower socioeconomic status and some visible minority groups have greater exposure in urban centres. DATA AND METHODS: National residential PM2.5 was estimated from a ~1 km² spatial layer for respondents to the 2006 Census long-form questionnaire. Weighted PM2.5 estimates from personal-level estimates were determined for white, Aboriginal, visible minority and immigrant populations, as well as for socioeconomic groups (household income, educational attainment) and stratified by urban core, urban fringe and rural residence. Descriptive statistics were provided for selected comparisons. RESULTS: In Canada, PM2.5 exposure was 1.61 μg/m³ higher for visible minority (versus white) populations, and 1.55 μg/m³ higher for immigrants (versus non-immigrants). When the relatively high percentages of these groups in large cities were taken into account, exposure differences in urban cores were much smaller. Exposure among urban immigrants did not decrease substantially with time since immigration (< 0.5 μg/m³ between any two years). In urban cores, residents of low-income households had marginally higher exposure (0.56 μg/m³) than did people who were not in low-income households. INTERPRETATION: Differences between specific population groups in exposure to PM2.5 are due, at least in part, to higher percentages of these groups living in urban cores where air pollution levels are elevated.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.232

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicAir Quality and Health Impacts→French-language works237,207→