The influence of urban trees and total vegetation on asthma development in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: We aimed to assess whether the influence of urban vegetation on asthma development in children (<13 years) varies by type (e.g., total vegetation, tree type, and grass) and season. Methods: We used a cohort of all children born in Montreal, Canada, between 2000 and 2015. Children and cases were identified from linked medico-administrative databases. Exposure to residential vegetation was estimated using the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) for total vegetation and using the total area covered by deciduous and evergreen crowns for trees in 250 m buffers centered on residential postal codes. Seasonal variations in vegetation were modeled by setting values to zero on days outside of pollen and leaf-on seasons. Cox models with vegetation exposures, age as a time axis, and adjusted for sex, material deprivation, and health region were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) for asthma development. Results: ) of deciduous crown area for the leaf-on season (HR = 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.67, 0.72) and increased for the pollen season (HR = 1.07; 95% CI =1.02, 1.12), compared with unexposed children. Similar results were found with the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index. Conclusion: The relationship between urban vegetation and childhood asthma development is nonlinear and influenced by vegetation characteristics, from protective during the leaf-on season to harmful during the pollen season.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".