Relationship between different particle size fractions and all-cause and cause-specific emergency ambulance dispatches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evidence on the relationship between different particle size fractions and emergency ambulance dispatches (EAD) remains limited and sparse. METHODS: We collected daily data of EAD, ambient air pollution and meteorological data from 2014 to 2018 in Guangzhou, China. We used a generalized additive model with covariate adjustments to estimate the associations between different particle size fractions and EAD related to all-cause, cardiovascular diseases, and respiratory diseases. Several subgroup and sensitivity analyses were also performed. RESULTS: was associated with an increase of 0.98% (95% CI: 0.67, 1.28%), 2.06% (95% CI: 1.44, 2.68%), and 0.75% (95%CI: 0.53, 0.96%) in all-cause EAD, with an increase of 0.69% (95% CI: 0.00, 1.39%), 2.04% (95% CI: 0.64, 3.45%), and 0.60% (95%CI: 0.11,1.10%) in cardiovascular-related EAD, and an increase of 1.14% (95% CI: 0.25, 2.04%), 2.52% (95% CI: 0.72, 4.35%), and 0.89% (95%CI: 0.25,1.52%) in respiratory-related EAD at lag03, respectively. The results were robust in subgroup and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: were significantly related with risks of all-cause and cause-specific EAD. More evidence of high quality may be needed to further support our results in this ecological study.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".