MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404254340 · doi:10.1504/ijgw.2024.142600

The effects of climate change on respiratory diseases: a literature review

2024· review· en· W4404254340 on OpenAlexaff
Kristina Marie Scerri, Sarah Cuschieri

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Global Warming · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeEnvironmental scienceRespiratory systemIntensive care medicineClimatologyMedicineInternal medicineBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change is an expanding global epidemic, causing shocking effects as it led to a rise in non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Exploring relationships between the effects of climate change and respiratory diseases are significant. The aim of this narrative review is to provide a detailed summary on the impact of climate change on respiratory diseases. A PubMed literature search (2000-2022) was performed using the following keywords, 'climate change', 'respiratory diseases', 'temperature', 'air pollution', 'wildfires', 'floods', 'thunderstorms', 'dust storms', 'asthma', 'pollen', and 'healthcare system'. Heat and cold temperatures, air pollution, wildfires, droughts, thunderstorms and dust storms as well as allergens were found to have a positive association between climate change and respiratory diseases. The impact of climate change on respiratory diseases is detrimental. If adaptive strategies are not implemented, these climatic effects will lead to a higher respiratory burden among the population and healthcare systems, with potential economic downfall, and an uninhabitable world.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.010
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.372 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Global WarmingSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207