MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410796407 · doi:10.1055/a-2542-8711

Gesundheitliche Auswirkungen von Waldbränden

2025· review· de· W4410796407 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thomas Münzel, Andreas Daiber

Bibliographic record

VenueDMW - Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift · 2025
Typereview
Languagede
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing frequency and intensity of wildfires, exacerbated by climate change, pose a significant threat to both the environment and human health. In addition to destroying ecosystems, these fires cause severe air pollution, particularly through fine particulate matter (PM2.5, diameter ≤ 2.5 µm), which can be transported over long distances. A recent example are the wildfires in Canada, whose smoke enveloped New York City in dense smog. Fine particulate matter increases the risk of cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, especially among vulnerable groups such as children, pregnant women, individuals with preexisting conditions, and the elderly. Globally, emissions from wildfires are linked to hundreds of thousands of premature deaths annually. Protective measures such as early warning systems, air filtration systems, and the use of masks can help reduce exposure. However, knowledge gaps remain, particularly regarding the specific components of pollutants and their interactions with environmental factors. Long-term research is essential to better understand the health impacts and to develop targeted prevention strategies. Wildfires underscore the urgent need for global climate protection measures and innovative approaches to public health preparedness.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.563
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.059

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.296 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDMW - Deutsche Medizinische WochenschriftSame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207