MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412530097 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-12210-4

Heatwaves amplify air pollution risks in Sub-Saharan Africa

2025· article· en· W4412530097 on OpenAlexaff
Egide Kalisa, Andrew Sudmant

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAir pollutionPollutionEnvironmental healthEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceGeographyMedicineBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mounting evidence demonstrates that heatwaves aggravate urban air pollution, with substantial impacts on public health, but comparatively little research has addressed Sub-Saharan African contexts. In this study, we focused on Kigali, Rwanda, to assess the relationship between extreme heat events and concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ), nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), and ozone (O 3 ) from 2021 to 2024. Using low-cost sensors for dense spatiotemporal coverage, our analysis finds that O 3 concentrations increased significantly during 6 heatwave events with peak values up to 40% higher during heatwaves. Heatwaves also resulted in spikes in PM 2.5 and NO 2 , however the diurnal and seasonal analyses showed that PM 2.5 and NO 2 dynamics were shaped more by local emissions than temperature alone. These results highlight the compound risks of heat and air pollution in sub-Saharan African cities, underscoring the importance of early-warning systems and robust urban policies that account for both heat and air pollution. In addition, the atmospheric dynamics identified in this research differ from those observed in many high-income countries, highlighting a critical need for more research exploring the intersection of heat and air pollution in Sub-Saharan Africa.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicClimate Change and Health Impacts→French-language works237,207→