Exhaled carbon monoxide levels in preschool‐age children with episodic asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The concentration of exhaled carbon monoxide (eCO) in young children with stable asthma and during acute asthma attack is not known. METHODS: A sampling bag was developed to collect the exhaled air of preschool children. A total of 257 preschool-age children (≥ 3 years and ≤ 6 years old) were studied; 111 had a diagnosis of asthma (43 suffering a mild asthma attack and 68 without active asthmatic symptom), 99 had upper respiratory infection (URI) and 47 were healthy. RESULTS: In preschool-age children, eCO levels of those with asthma attacks (mean ± SE, 2.7 ± 0.3 p.p.m., n= 43) were significantly higher than those of subjects with asymptomatic asthma (0.5 ± 0.1 p.p.m., P < 0.05), URI (0.8 ± 0.1 p.p.m., P < 0.05) and healthy children (0.4 ± 0.1 p.p.m., P < 0.05). A multivariate linear regression model showed that eCO was higher in children with asthma attacks independent of age and gender. In 33 asthmatic children followed before and after treatment, eCO levels during asthma attacks significantly decreased after inhalation therapy with a combination of salbutamol and sodium cromoglycate (before therapy, 2.9 ± 0.4 p.p.m.; after therapy, 0.6 ± 0.1 p.p.m., P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The measurement of eCO using a novel collecting system is useful in the recognition of asthma in preschool children.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".