MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386136010 · doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm7234a5

Asthma-Associated Emergency Department Visits During the Canadian Wildfire Smoke Episodes — United States, April– August 2023

2023· article· en· W4386136010 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cristin E. McArdle, Tia C. Dowling, Kelly Carey, Jourdan DeVies, Dylan Johns, Abigail Gates, Zachary Stein, Katharina L. van Santen, Lakshmi Radhakrishnan, Aaron Kite-Powell, Karl Soetebier, Jason D. Sacks, Kanta Sircar, Kathleen P. Hartnett, Maria C. Mirabelli

Bibliographic record

VenueMMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmergency departmentAsthmaSmokeEnvironmental healthAerodynamic diameterAir quality indexPublic healthDemographyMeteorologyGeographyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During April 30-August 4, 2023, smoke originating from wildfires in Canada affected most of the contiguous United States.CDC used National Syndromic Surveillance Program data to assess numbers and percentages of asthma-associated emergency department (ED) visits on days with wildfire smoke, compared with days without wildfire smoke.Wildfire smoke days were defined as days when concentrations of particulate matter (particles generally ≤2.5 µm in aerodynamic diameter) (PM 2.5 ) triggered an Air Quality Index ≥101, corresponding to the air quality categorization, "Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups."Changes in asthma-associated ED visits were assessed across U.S. Department of Health and Human Services regions and by age.Overall, asthma-associated ED visits were 17% higher than expected during the 19 days with wildfire smoke that occurred during the study period; larger increases were observed in regions that experienced higher numbers of continuous wildfire smoke days and among persons aged 5-17 and 18-64 years.These results can help guide emergency response planning and public health communication strategies, especially in U.S. regions where wildfire smoke exposure was previously uncommon.* Approximation based on U.S. Census Bureau estimated decennial population distribution by U.S. Department of Health and Human Services region and Environmental Protection Agency monitors meeting at least one measured 24-hour average concentration ≥35.5 µg/m 3 for PM 2.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations57
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly ReportSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207