Inequality in the Distribution of Air Pollution Attributable Mortality Within Canadian Cities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recent studies have identified inequality in the distribution of air pollution attributable health impacts, but to our knowledge this has not been examined in Canadian cities. We evaluated the extent and sources of inequality in air pollution attributable mortality at the census tract (CT) level in seven of Canada's largest cities. We first regressed fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) attributable mortality against the neighborhood (CT) level prevalence of age 65 and older, low income, low educational attainment, and identification as an Indigenous (First Nations, Métis, Inuit) or Black person, accounting for spatial autocorrelation. We next examined the distribution of baseline mortality rates, PM2.5 and NO2 concentrations, and attributable mortality by neighborhood (CT) level prevalence of these characteristics, calculating the concentration index, Atkinson index, and Gini coefficient. Finally, we conducted a counterfactual analysis of the impact of reducing baseline mortality rates and air pollution concentrations on inequality in air pollution attributable mortality. Regression results indicated that CTs with a higher prevalence of low income and Indigenous identity had significantly higher air pollution attributable mortality. Concentration index, Atkinson index, and Gini coefficient values revealed different degrees of inequality among the cities. Counterfactual analysis indicated that inequality in air pollution attributable mortality tended to be driven more by baseline mortality inequalities than exposure inequalities. Reducing inequality in air pollution attributable mortality requires reducing disparities in both baseline mortality and air pollution exposure.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".