MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Estimating the impacts of fine particulate matter concentration from different sources on the mortality of cardiovascular diseases: a population-based cohort study

2020· article· en· W3168984589 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lianhua Bai, Rick Burnett, Jun Meng, Randall V. Martin, Jeffrey C. Kwong, Aaron van Donkelaar, Hongyu Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueISEE Conference Abstracts · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental healthHazard ratioParticulatesCohortConfidence intervalProportional hazards modelCohort studyPopulationMedicineDemographyEnvironmental scienceEcologySurgeryBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Evidence is limited about the health impacts of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) mass originated from different sources. Methods: We assessed the associations of cardiovascular mortality with PM2.5 mass from ten major sources including residential, transportation, industry, agriculture, wild fire, dust, sea salt, biogenic SOA, power generation, and others. We constructed a cohort that comprised all Ontario adults who, on 1 January 2001, were 35-85 years old (~5.26 million subjects) and were followed up until 31 December 2016. The Ontario Registrar General information on deaths was used to ascertain cardiovascular deaths. We assigned the estimates of PM2.5 mass from these sources to participants’ annual postal-code addresses during follow-up. Using standard Cox proportional hazards models, we calculated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for source-specific PM2.5 mass, adjusted for both individual- and neighborhood-level covariates. We considered models for PM2.5 mass from each source individually and in combination. Results: During follow-up, we identified 305,353 deaths from cardiovascular diseases. Transportation, industry, and residential sectors are three greatest contributors of PM2.5 mass in Ontario. The residential sector was strongly correlated with the transportation sector (r=0.89), moderately with the industry sector (r=0.46), and weakly correlated with other sectors. In the single-pollutant models, we found the elevated risk of cardiovascular deaths with each unit increase in exposure to PM2.5 mass from industry, transportation, agriculture, dust, and power generation sectors with HRs ranging from 1.001 to 1.612. In the multi-pollutant model with all ten sectors included, the strongest positive association was observed with power generation, followed by residential combustion, and wild fire. Conclusion: Our study suggests that PM2.5 mass from human-made sources might have a greater impact on cardiovascular diseases than that from natural sources. Future investigations are warranted to evaluate the joint health impacts of PM2.5 and related sources.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.612
Threshold uncertainty score0.781

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISEE Conference AbstractsSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207