Comparison for the effects of different components of temperature variability on mortality: A multi-country time-series study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Temperature variability (TV) is associated with increased mortality risk. However, it is still unknown whether intra-day or inter-day TV has a higher effect. We aimed to assess the association of intra-day TV and inter-day TV with all-cause, cardiovascular, and respiratory mortality. We collected data on total, cardiovascular, and respiratory mortality and meteorology from 758 locations in 47 countries or regions from 1972 to 2020. We defined inter-day TV as the standard deviation (SD) of daily mean temperatures across the lag interval, and intra-day TV as the average SD of minimum and maximum temperatures on each day. In the first stage, inter-day and intra-day TVs were modelled simultaneously in the quasi-Poisson time-series model for each location. In the second stage, a multi-level analysis was used to pool the location-specific estimates. Overall, the mortality risk due to each interquartile range [IQR] increase was higher for intra-day TV than for inter-day TV. The risk increased by 0.59% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53, 0.65) for all-cause mortality, 0.64% (95% CI: 0.56, 0.73) for cardiovascular mortality, and 0.65% (95% CI: 0.49, 0.80) for respiratory mortality per IQR increase in intra-day TV0–7 (0.9 °C). An IQR increase in inter-day TV0–7 (1.6 °C) was associated with 0.22% (95% CI: 0.18, 0.26) increase in all-cause mortality, 0.44% (95% CI: 0.37, 0.50) increase in cardiovascular mortality, and 0.31% (95% CI: 0.21, 0.41) increase in respiratory mortality. The proportion of all-cause deaths attributable to intra-day TV0–7 and inter-day TV0–7 was 1.45% and 0.35%, respectively. The mortality risks varied by lag interval, climate area, season, and climate type. Our results indicated that intra-day TV may explain the main part of the mortality risk related to TV and suggested that comprehensive evaluations should be proposed in more countries to help protect human health.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".