Pulmonary exacerbations and parent‐reported outcomes in children <6 years with cystic fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pulmonary exacerbations (PEs) are used as clinical endpoints in infants and preschool children with cystic fibrosis (CF); however, their characteristics and impact in this age range are poorly understood. We used data from the Infant Study of Inhaled Saline, a multicenter trial of inhaled hypertonic versus isotonic saline, to describe PEs in children with CF <6 years and evaluate associations between PEs and parent-reported outcomes assessed by a weekly parent questionnaire (10 items) and three scales of the Cystic Fibrosis Questionnaire-Revised (CFQ-R), and other participant characteristics. There were 659 PEs among 253 of the 321 ISIS participants (mean age 2.3 years) during 287 participant-years follow-up. Of the 659 PEs, 636 (97%) were treated with oral and 45 (7%) with IV antibiotics (not mutually exclusive). Among 222 participants with PEs who had completed parent questionnaires during a PE and at baseline, 9 of the 10 symptoms were each present in a statistically significantly higher proportion of participants during a PE than at baseline. Lower (worse) baseline Respiratory Symptom and Physical Functioning CFQ-R scores were significantly associated with higher PE rate: rate ratio 1.08 (95%CI: 1.02, 1.14) and 1.21 (1.07, 1.36) per 10 point lower score in respective scale. A higher PE rate was also significantly associated with worse CFQ-R Respiratory Symptom and Physical Functioning scores at the end of the study, adjusted for baseline scores. Though most PEs did not require IV antibiotics, PEs appeared to have a negative impact on parent-reported health outcomes in infants and preschoolers with CF. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2015; 50:236-243. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".