Air pollution and emergency department visits for diseases of the musculoskeletal system, Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: The objective of this study is to examine the associations between urban ambient air pollution and emergency department (ED) visits due to diseases of the musculoskeletal system in Toronto, Canada. METHODS: The National Ambulatory Care Reporting System database was used to retrieve health cases corresponding to these diseases using ICD-10 codes M00-M99.The studied period is April 2004 to December 2015 (4,292 days). Six air pollutants (fine particulate matter PM2.5, CO, NO2, SO2, ozone O3 as a daily average, ozone O3-8 hour, as a maximum eight hour average) and two indexes were considered. Conditional Poisson regression was applied to daily ED visit counts. Temperature and relative humidity were represented in the form of splines.The potential associations were analyzed by strata (sex, age group, and season: warm/cold) and for lagged concentrations (lag 0-14 days). RESULTS:691,703 ED visits were retrieved, among which 368,089 were female individuals, and 323,614 males. Among 2,160 tested models, 106 positive associations were statistically significant at P-Value0.05. Ozone concentration constituted 24 of the positive associations for exposures lagged by 1 and 8 or more days. Strong effects were obtained for same-day exposures to CO and NO2. Relative risk (RR) was reported for a one interquartile range (IQR) increase in the concentration of NO2 (IQR=8.8 ppb). For nitrogen dioxide RR=1.014 (95% confidence interval: 1.008, 1.020), RR=1.019 (1.011, 1.026), and RR=1.009 (1.002, 1.017) for all, female, and male patients, respectively. The values for CO (IQR=0.1 ppm) in 60+ individuals were: RR=1.013 (1.005, 1.021), RR=1.017 (1.007, 1.027), and RR=1.007 (0.995, 1.019), respectively. CONCLUSIONS:The results suggest that carbon monoxide and nitrogen dioxide concentrations can increase ED visit frequency particularly for same-day exposures. Ground-level ozone showed a delayed effect of one week. The most affected demographic out of those studied were older individuals, as reflected in their relative risk values. KEYWORDS: Air pollution, Exposures, Female, Traffic-related
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.007 | 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".