Air pollution and meteorology as risk factors for COVID-19 death in a cohort from Southern California
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent evidence links ambient air pollution to COVID-19 incidence, severity, and death, but few studies have analyzed individual-level mortality data with high quality exposure models. We sought to assess whether higher air pollution exposures led to greater risk of death during or after hospitalization in confirmed COVID-19 cases among patients who were members of the Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) healthcare system (N=21,415 between 06-01-2020 and 01-31-2022 of whom 99.85 % were unvaccinated during the study period). We used 1 km resolution chemical transport models to estimate ambient concentrations of several common air pollutants, including ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and fine particle matter (PM2.5). We also derived estimates of pollutant exposures from ultra-fine particulate matter (PM0.1), PM chemical species, and PM sources. We employed Cox proportional hazards models to assess associations between air pollution exposures and death from COVID-19 among hospitalized patients. We found significant associations between COVID-19 death and several air pollution exposures, including: PM2.5 mass, PM0.1 mass, PM2.5 nitrates, PM2.5 elemental carbon, PM2.5 on-road diesel, and PM2.5 on-road gasoline. Based on the interquartile (IQR) exposure increment, effect sizes ranged from hazard ratios (HR) = 1.12 for PM2.5 mass and PM2.5 nitrate to HR ∼ 1.06–1.07 for other species or source markers. Humidity and temperature in the month of diagnosis were also significant negative predictors of COVID-19 death and negative modifiers of the air pollution effects. Air pollution exposures and meteorology were associated the risk of COVID-19 death in a cohort of patients from Southern California. These findings have implications for prevention of death from COVID-19 and for future pandemics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".