Ambient air pollution exposure and chronic bronchitis in the Lifelines cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Few large studies have assessed the relationship of long-term ambient air pollution exposure with the prevalence and incidence of symptoms of chronic bronchitis and cough. Methods We leveraged Lifelines cohort data on 132 595 (baseline) and 65 009 (second assessment) participants linked to ambient air pollution estimates. Logistic regression models adjusted for sex, age, educational attainment, body mass index, smoking status, pack-years smoking and environmental tobacco smoke at home were used to assess associations of air pollution with prevalence and incidence of chronic bronchitis (winter cough and sputum almost daily for ≥3 months/year), chronic cough (winter cough almost daily for ≥3 months/year) and prevalence of cough and sputum symptoms, irrespective of duration. Results Associations were seen for all pollutants for prevalent cough or sputum symptoms. However, for prevalent and incident chronic bronchitis, statistically significant associations were seen for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and black carbon (BC) but not for fine particulate matter (PM2.5). For prevalent chronic bronchitis, associations with NO2showed OR: 1.05 (95% CI: 1.02 to 1.08) and with BC OR: 1.06 (95% CI: 1.03 to 1.09) expressed per IQR; corresponding results for incident chronic bronchitis were NO2OR: 1.07 (95% CI: 1.02 to 1.13) and BC OR: 1.07 (95% CI: 1.02 to 1.13). In subgroup analyses, slightly stronger associations were observed among women, never smokers and younger individuals. Conclusion This is the largest analysis to date to examine cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between ambient air pollution and chronic bronchitis. NO2and BC air pollution was associated with increased odds of prevalent and incident chronic bronchitis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".