Does choice of outdoor heat metric affect heat-related epidemiologic analyses in the US Medicare population?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Outdoor air temperature is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Other thermal indices theoretically confer greater physiological relevance by incorporating additional meteorological variables. However, the optimal metric for predicting excess deaths or hospitalizations owing to extreme heat among US Medicare beneficiaries remains unknown. Methods: We calculated daily maximum, minimum, and mean outdoor air temperature (T), heat index (HI), wet-bulb globe temperature (WBGT), and Universal Thermal Climate Index (UTCI) for populous US counties and linked estimates with daily all-cause mortality and heat-related hospitalizations among Medicare beneficiaries (2006–2016). We fit distributed-lag nonlinear models for each metric and compared relative risks (RRs) at the 99th percentile. Results: Across all heat metrics, extreme heat was statistically significantly associated with elevated risks of morbidity and mortality. Associations were more pronounced for maximum daily values versus the corresponding minimum for the same metric. The starkest example was between HI max (RR = 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.12, 1.15) and HI min (RR = 1.10; 95% CI = 1.09, 1.11) for hospitalizations. When comparing RRs across heat metrics, we found no statistically significant differences within the minimum and maximum heat values (i.e., no significant differences between T max /HI max /WBGT max /UTCI max or between T min /HI min /WBGT min /UTCI min ). We found similar relationships across the National Climate Assessment regions. Conclusion: Among Medicare beneficiaries in populous US counties, daily maximum and mean values of outdoor heat are associated with greater RRs of heat-related morbidity and all-cause mortality versus minimum values of the same metric. The choice of heat metric (e.g., temperature versus HI) does not appear to substantively affect risk calculations in this population.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".