Transition of care from adolescence to early adulthood in severe asthmatic patients treated with omalizumab in real life
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Transitional care consists of managing patients with chronic disease or disability from the pediatric to the adult care system [1–3]. It aims to prepare adolescents to manage their disease to become autonomous young adults, and to avoid any gap in the disease management. To succeed, transitional care must be an integral part of the management, coordinated by the healthcare team [3, 4]. However, to date, transition period remains critical in current practice, with a risk of loss to follow-up and deterioration in the health of adolescents with chronic conditions [5]. Footnotes This manuscript has recently been accepted for publication in the ERJ Open Research . It is published here in its accepted form prior to copyediting and typesetting by our production team. After these production processes are complete and the authors have approved the resulting proofs, the article will move to the latest issue of the ERJOR online. Please open or download the PDF to view this article. Conflict of interest: Camille Taillé reports support for the present manuscript from Novartis. Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Astrazeneca, Chiesi, GSK, Novartis, Sanofi, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: Arnaud Bourdin reports support for the present manuscript from Novartis. Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Astrazeneca, Chiesi, GSK, Novartis, Sanofi, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: Antoine Deschildre reports support for the present manuscript from Novartis. Grants or contracts from Fondation du Souffle; Conseil Régional Hauts-de- France”- program 2014–2018 (grant number: ARCiR 2015–284), outside the submitted work; consulting fees from Novartis, ALK, GSK, Sanofi, Aimmune Therapeutics, DBV Technologies, Nestlé Health Science, Boehringer Ingelheim, outside the submitted work; Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Novartis, ALK, GSK, Sanofi, Aimmune Therapeutics, DBV Technologies, Nestlé Health Science, Boehringer Ingelheim, outside the submitted work; Support for attending meetings and/or travel from ALK, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, Stallergenes Greer, Novartis, Astra-Zeneca, Meda, DBV Technologies, Aimmune, Nutricia, outside the submitted work. Participation on Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) for BOOM study: BOOM study ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: [NCT04045301][1] Lead Investigator: Philippe Bégin (Montreal), outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: Marc HUMBERT reports support for the present manuscript from Novartis. Consulting fees from Astrazeneca, Chiesi, GSK, Novartis, Sanofi, outside the submitted work. Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Astrazeneca, GSK, Novartis, Sanofi, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: Audrey Lajoinie reports support for the present manuscript from Novartis. Conflict of interest: Mathieu Molimard reports support for the present manuscript from Novartis. Consulting fees from Novartis and Stallergen, outside the submitted work; Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Banook, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: Céline Thonnelier reports support for the present manuscript from Novartis. [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT04045301&atom=%2Ferjor%2Fearly%2F2024%2F02%2F15%2F23120541.00976-2023.atom
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».