MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415541872 · doi:10.1016/j.envres.2025.123172

Towards cleaner air: PM2.5 exposure and disparities around childcare providers in England

2025· article· en· W4415541872 on OpenAlexaff
Joana Cruz, Guangquan Li, Amal Rammah, Jian Zhong, Niloofar Shoari, Selin Akaraci, Samantha Hajna, Caroline Hart, Rosemary C Chamberlain, Christina Mitsakou, Karen Exley, William J. Bloss, Richard Fry, Steven Cummins, Pia Hardelid

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersHealth Data Research UKNatural Environment Research CouncilNIHR Great Ormond Street Hospital Biomedical Research CentreEconomic and Social Research CouncilGreat Ormond Street Institute of Child HealthNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchUK Research and InnovationDepartment of Health and Social CareWellcome Trust
KeywordsPsychological interventionAir pollutionPublic healthPopulationAir quality indexEffect modificationGuidelinePopulation health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Air pollution poses a significant health risk for young children, particularly in urban and deprived areas. Exposure to fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) during early life may contribute to long-term adverse health outcomes. This study examined changes in PM 2.5 concentrations around Early Years Providers (EYPs; childcare providers) in England from 2018 to 2022. We assessed associations between small-area socio-demographic characteristics and exposure levels exceeding the World Health Organisation (WHO) 2021 annual air quality guideline (>5 μg/m 3 ). We integrated data on EYPs locations from Ordnance Survey with annual PM 2.5 estimates from DEFRA using Geographic Information Systems and socio-demographic indicators — deprivation, urbanicity, and ethnic composition. A Bayesian spatial regression model with random effects was used to estimate adjusted associations between PM 2.5 levels and local population characteristics. The number of EYPs ranged from 15,780 in 2018 to 18,427 in 2019. Mean PM 2.5 levels around EYPs changed by 17.8% over the study period (from 9.4 μg/m 3 [SD=1.8] in 2018 to 7.8 μg/m 3 [SD=1.5] in 2022). However, PM 2.5 levels at over 96% of EYPs remained above the WHO 2021 annual guideline throughout. Higher PM 2.5 concentrations were observed in EYPs located in more deprived, urban, and predominantly non-white communities. Despite recent improvements, PM 2.5 levels around most EYPs in England remain above recommended thresholds. Targeted interventions in deprived urban areas are needed to reduce young children’s exposure and address environmental health inequalities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.409
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ResearchSame topicAir Quality and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207