Impact of a long‐term air pollution exposure on the case fatality rate of COVID‐19 patients—A multicity study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Evidence in the literature suggests that air pollution exposure affects outcomes of patients with COVID‐19. However, the extent of this effect requires further investigation. This study was designed to investigate the relationship between long‐term exposure to air pollution and the case fatality rate (CFR) of patients with COVID‐19. The data on air quality index (AQI), PM2.5, PM10, SO 2 , NO 2 , and O 3 from 14 major cities in China in the past 5 years (2015–2020) were collected, and the CRF of COVID‐19 patients in these cities was calculated. First, we investigated the correlation between CFR and long‐term air quality indicators. Second, we examined the air pollutants affecting CFR and evaluated their predictive values. We found a positive correlation between the CFR and AQI (1, 3, and 5 years), PM2.5 (1, 3, and 5 years), and PM10 (1, 3, and 5 years). Further analysis indicated the more significant correlation for both AQI (3 and 5 years) and PM2.5 (1, 3, and 5 years) with CFR, and moderate predictive values for air pollution indicators such as AQI (1, 3, and 5 years) and PM2.5 (1, 3, and 5 years) for CFR. Our results indicate that long‐term exposure to severe air pollution is associated with higher CFR of COVID‐19 patients. Air pollutants such as PM2.5 may assist with the prediction of CFR for COVID‐19 patients.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".