MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6960865997 · doi:10.14288/1.0074714

Three Measures of Forest Fire Smoke Exposure and Their Associations with Respiratory and Cardiovascular Health Outcomes in a Population-Based Cohort

2015· article· en· W6960865997 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Collections · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterquartile rangeCohortConfidence intervalAerodynamic diameterLogistic regressionRespiratory systemOdds ratioCohort studyOdds

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: During the summer of 2003 numerous fires burned in British Columbia, Canada. OBJECTIVES: We examined the associations between respiratory and cardiovascular physician visits and hospital admissions, and three measures of smoke exposure over a 92-day study period (1 July to 30 September 2003). METHODS: A population-based cohort of 281,711 residents was identified from administrative data. Spatially specific daily exposure estimates were assigned to each subject based on total measurements of particulate matter (PM) ≤ 10 μm in aerodynamic diameter (PM₁₀) from six regulatory tapered element oscillating microbalance (TEOM) air quality monitors, smoke-related PM₁₀ from a CALPUFF dispersion model run for the study, and a SMOKE exposure metric for plumes visible in satellite images. Logistic regression with repeated measures was used to estimate associations with each outcome. RESULTS: The mean (± SD) exposure based on TEOM-measured PM₁₀ was 29 ± 31 μg/m³, with an interquartile range of 14–31 μg/m³. Correlations between the TEOM, smoke, and CALPUFF metrics were moderate (0.37–0.76). Odds ratios (ORs) for a 30‑μg/m³ increase in TEOM-based PM₁₀ were 1.05 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.03–1.06] for all respiratory physician visits, 1.16 (95% CI, 1.09–1.23) for asthma-specific visits, and 1.15 (95% CI, 1.00–1.29) for respiratory hospital admissions. Associations with cardiovascular outcomes were largely null. CONCLUSIONS: Overall we found that increases in TEOM-measured PM₁₀ were associated with increased odds of respiratory physician visits and hospital admissions, but not with cardiovascular health outcomes. Results indicating effects of fire smoke on respiratory outcomes are consistent with previous studies, as are the null results for cardiovascular outcomes. Some agreement between TEOM and the other metrics suggests that exposure assessment tools that are independent of air quality monitoring may be useful with further refinement.

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)0.001
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 score0.364
Threshold uncertainty score0.724

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Collections→Same topicBioinformatics and Genomic Networks→French-language works237,207→