Household Air Pollution and Angina Pectoris in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Cross-Sectional Evidence from the World Health Survey 2002–2003
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evidence regarding the effects of household air pollution on angina pectoris is limited in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). We sought to examine the association between household air pollution and angina pectoris across several countries. We analyzed data of individuals from 46 selected countries participating in the cross-sectional World Health Survey (WHS) 2002-2003. Pooled and stratified (sex, continent) logistic regression with sampling weights was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to quantify associations between the use of different household fuels with angina pectoris. In the pooled sample, we observed lower odds of angina pectoris with electricity use (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.56-0.83) compared to those households reporting the use of gas as a household fuel. Increased odds of angina pectoris were observed with the use of agriculture/dung/shrub/other (OR: 1.65, 95% CI: 1.30-2.09), mixed (solid and non-solid fuels) (OR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.09-1.56), and mixed solid fuel use (OR: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.12-2.25). Higher odds of angina pectoris were observed mainly with solid fuel use. The results highlight the importance of addressing these issues, especially in regions with a high proportion of solid fuel users and increasing levels of cardiovascular disease.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".