MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410352860 · doi:10.1016/s2542-5196(25)00075-0

Climate disaster effects on acute health care: a case study and model of the 2021 heatwave in British Columbia, Canada

2025· article· en· W4410352860 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dylan G. Clark, Kevin Liang, Ivy Cheng, James D. Ford, Kira Gossack‐Keenan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Planetary Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalSunnybrook Health Science CentreVancouver Coastal HealthPacific Institute for Climate Solutions
Fundersnot available
Keywords2019-20 coronavirus outbreakGeographyClimate changePolitical scienceMedicineVirologyEcologyOutbreakBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Acute health-care systems are a final layer of protection against growing climate impacts on population health. Climate disasters over the past decade have resulted in surges of patients seeking emergency care when preventive measures fall short. We aimed to understand how acute health-care delivery and access is vulnerable to climate disasters. METHODS: We built a discrete event simulation model to replicate acute health-care system dynamics during Canada's deadliest climate disaster-the 2021 heatwave. We used public data and government reports to estimate resource capacity per capita and interconnected trajectories to define the movement of patients between resources. In an intervention scenario, we evaluated the efficacy of a package of three interventions in the emergency department and prehospital settings (upstaffing before the disaster, mass casualty procedures, and outpatient cooling beds). Across a 29-day period, we measured six key performance indicators (KPIs) to compare statistical changes in waiting times between baseline and intervention models (physician initial assessment waiting time; waiting time for emergency department bed among most acute patients; waiting time for emergency department bed among least acute patients; ambulance response time; boarding time; and total time in the emergency department). Using Monte Carlo methods, we ran both baseline and intervention models 100 times. FINDINGS: We validated baseline model outputs against real-world data, with no statistically significant differences in all KPI medians. The baseline model showed significant negative effects on five of the six KPIs during the heatwave compared with the preheatwave period. Under the intervention model, four KPIs had significant improvements during the heatwave compared with the preheatwave period while the other two KPIs did not significantly change. Notably, emergency department waiting times decreased by over 35% with the interventions. INTERPRETATION: The model replicated real-world patterns and was a valid representation of system dynamics. Our findings showed that even a small surge in patients can be detrimental to health-care access and delivery. The model also suggests that health-care delays during climate disasters can be avoidable with proactive planning. FUNDING: The Government of British Columbia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Planetary HealthSame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207