Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37029251›Full record

ArticleJournal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology2023

Heat-mortality relationship in North Carolina: Comparison using different exposure methods.

Hayon Michelle Choi, Michelle L Bell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Hayon Michelle ChoiSchool of the Environment, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA. hayonmichelle.choi@yale.edu.
Michelle L BellSchool of the Environment, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Environmental Health Disparities in an Older PopulationR01MD012769 · NIMHD · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI BELL, MICHELLE L · 2017 to 2021
$3.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NIMHD NIH HHS R01 MD012769
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany studies have explored the heat-mortality relationship; however, comparability of results is hindered by the studies' use of different exposure methods.

objectiveThis study evaluated different methods for estimating exposure to temperature using individual-level data and examined the impacts on the heat-mortality relationship.

methodsWe calculated different temperature exposures for each individual death by using a modeled, gridded temperature dataset and a monitoring station dataset in North Carolina for 2000-2016. We considered individual-level vs. county-level averages and measured vs. modeled temperature data. A case-crossover analysis was conducted to examine the heat-mortality risk under different exposure methods.

resultsThe minimum mortality temperature (MMT) (i.e., the temperature with the lowest mortality rate) for the monitoring station dataset was 23.87 °C and 22.67 °C (individual monitor and county average, respectively), whereas for the modeled temperature dataset the MMT was 19.46 °C and 19.61 °C (individual and county, respectively). We found higher heat-mortality risk while using temperature exposure estimated from monitoring stations compared to risk based on exposure using the modeled temperature dataset. Individual-aggregated monitoring station temperature exposure resulted in higher heat mortality risk (odds ratio (95% CI): 2.24 (95% CI: 2.21, 2.27)) for a relative temperature change comparing the 99th and 90th temperature percentiles, while modeled temperature exposure resulted in lower odds ratio of 1.27 (95% CI: 1.25, 1.29). SIGNIFICANCE: Our findings indicate that using different temperature exposure methods can result in different temperature-mortality risk. The impact of using various exposure methods should be considered in planning health policies related to high temperatures, including under climate change. IMPACT STATEMENT: (1) We estimated the heat-mortality association using different methods to estimate exposure to temperature. (2) The mean temperature value among different exposure methods were similar although lower for the modeled data, however, use of the monitoring station temperature dataset resulted in higher heat-mortality risk than the modeled temperature dataset. (3) Differences in mortality risk from heat by urbanicity varies depending on the method used to estimate temperature exposure.

Indexed as

Climate ChangeHot TemperatureHumansMortalityNorth CarolinaTemperatureExposure ModelingHealth StudiesPersonal Exposure.

Identifiers

PMID37029251
PMCPMC10403356

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.