Differential Mortality Risks Associated With PM2.5 Components
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The association between fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) and mortality widely differs between as well as within countries. Differences in PM 2.5 composition can play a role in modifying the effect estimates, but there is little evidence about which components have higher impacts on mortality. Methods: We applied a 2-stage analysis on data collected from 210 locations in 16 countries. In the first stage, we estimated location-specific relative risks (RR) for mortality associated with daily total PM 2.5 through time series regression analysis. We then pooled these estimates in a meta-regression model that included city-specific logratio-transformed proportions of seven PM 2.5 components as well as meta-predictors derived from city-specific socio-economic and environmental indicators. Results: We found associations between RR and several PM 2.5 components. Increasing the ammonium (NH 4 + ) proportion from 1% to 22%, while keeping a relative average proportion of other components, increased the RR from 1.0063 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 1.0030, 1.0097) to 1.0102 (95% CI = 1.0070, 1.0135). Conversely, an increase in nitrate (NO 3 − ) from 1% to 71% resulted in a reduced RR, from 1.0100 (95% CI = 1.0067, 1.0133) to 1.0037 (95% CI = 0.9998, 1.0077). Differences in composition explained a substantial part of the heterogeneity in PM 2.5 risk. Conclusions: These findings contribute to the identification of more hazardous emission sources. Further work is needed to understand the health impacts of PM 2.5 components and sources given the overlapping sources and correlations among many components.
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 | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".