MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401070944 · doi:10.1073/pnas.2310081121

Climate change and public health in California: A structured review of exposures, vulnerable populations, and adaptation measures

2024· review· en· W4401070944 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Michael Jerrett, Rachel Connolly, Diane A. Garcia‐Gonzales, Claire Bekker, Jenny T. Nguyen, Jason Su, Yang Li, Miriam E. Marlier

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth CanadaEarth Sciences DivisionNuclear Safety and Security CommissionCalifornia Air Resources BoardNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsPublic healthClimate changeEnvironmental healthPopulation healthGreenhouse gasEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningExtreme weatherDisadvantagedNatural resource economicsGeographyPopulationEnvironmental scienceMedicineEconomic growthEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

California faces several serious direct and indirect climate exposures that can adversely affect public health, some of which are already occurring. The public health burden now and in the future will depend on atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, underlying population vulnerabilities, and adaptation efforts. Here, we present a structured review of recent literature to examine the leading climate risks to public health in California, including extreme heat, extreme precipitation, wildfires, air pollution, and infectious diseases. Comparisons among different climate-health pathways are difficult due to inconsistencies in study design regarding spatial and temporal scales and health outcomes examined. We find, however, that the current public health burden likely affects thousands of Californians each year, depending on the exposure pathway and health outcome. Further, while more evidence exists for direct and indirect proximal health effects that are the focus of this review, distal pathways (e.g., impacts of drought on nutrition) are more uncertain but could add to this burden. We find that climate adaptation measures can provide significant health benefits, particularly in disadvantaged communities. We conclude with priority recommendations for future analyses and solution-driven policy actions.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.394
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.029 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences→Same topicClimate Change and Health Impacts→French-language works237,207→