MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223492032 · doi:10.1080/13696998.2022.2063603

Carbon footprint and associated costs of asthma exacerbation care among UK adults

2022· article· en· W4223492032 on OpenAlexaff
Kalé Kponee-Shovein, Jessica Marvel, Ryotaro Ishikawa, Abhay Choubey, Harneet Kaur, Praveen Thokala, Khadidja Ngom, Iman Fakih, Todd Schatzki, James Signorovitch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Economics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health Economics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon footprintExacerbationGreenhouse gasAsthmaMedicineAsthma exacerbationsEnvironmental healthPopulationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Asthma exacerbations are a primary driver of costs and health impacts from asthma. Despite research suggesting that asthma care has a disproportionate carbon footprint, emissions costs are not considered when evaluating its societal burden. To advance the understanding of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with asthma, we estimated the carbon footprint and associated costs of asthma exacerbation care by severity level among UK adults.Methods Guidelines for asthma exacerbation treatment in UK adults were reviewed by severity level: mild, moderate, and severe/life-threatening. Components of care for each severity were evaluated for GHG emission potential and key drivers were identified. Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions of drivers were sourced from published literature and combined to estimate the carbon footprint per exacerbation, by severity level. Emissions were scaled up to the annual UK adult population based on the annual number of exacerbations at each severity. Costs associated with emissions were estimated using the UK government’s 2020 nontraded price of carbon, at ₤71 per tonne CO2e (tCO2e).Results Overall, emissions drivers for exacerbations were medical services, including patient-travel, and quick-relief inhalers. The annual number of mild, moderate, and severe/life-threatening asthma exacerbations among UK adults were 118.9 M, 5.5 M, and 2.4 M. Associated annual carbon footprints were estimated to be 83,455 tCO2e, 192,709 tCO2e, and 448,037 tCO2e for mild, moderate, and severe/life-threatening exacerbations, respectively, with a total of 724,201 tCO2e. Total annual emissions costs from exacerbation care were £51.3 M; ₤5.9 M, ₤13.6 M, and ₤31.7 M for mild, moderate, and severe/life-threatening exacerbations, respectively.Conclusion GHG emissions from asthma exacerbation management were the highest for severe/life-threatening events, followed by moderate exacerbations. Treatment to reduce the severity and occurrence of exacerbations, such as effective, long-term control therapy via lower-emission dry powder inhalers (DPIs), can help mitigate asthma care emissions. For mild exacerbations, the use of DPIs can eliminate associated emissions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations36
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical EconomicsSame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207