MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1842152428 · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-4-19

Crowding: risk factor or protective factor for lower respiratory disease in young children?

2004· article· en· W1842152428 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Maria Regina Alves Cardoso, Simon Cousens, Luiz Fernando de Góes Siqueira, Luiz Antônio V D'Angelo

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPediatric health and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsMedicineBedroomBronchiolitisBronchitisAsthmaCrowdingPediatricsEnvironmental healthPublic healthRisk factorLogistic regressionDemographyRespiratory systemInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To study the effects of household crowding upon the respiratory health of young children living in the city of São Paulo, Brazil. METHODS: Case-control study with children aged from 2 to 59 months living within the boundaries of the city of São Paulo. Cases were children recruited from 5 public hospitals in central São Paulo with an acute episode of lower respiratory disease. Children were classified into the following diagnostic categories: acute bronchitis, acute bronchiolitis, pneumonia, asthma, post-bronchiolitis wheezing and wheezing of uncertain aetiology. One control, crudely matched to each case with regard to age (<2, 2 years old or more), was selected among healthy children living in the neighborhood of the case. All buildings were surveyed for the presence of environmental contaminants, type of construction and building material. Plans of all homes, including measurements of floor area, height of walls, windows and solar orientation, was performed. Data were analysed using conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 313 pairs of children were studied. Over 70% of the cases had a primary or an associated diagnosis of a wheezing illness. Compared with controls, cases tended to live in smaller houses with less adequate sewage disposal. Cases and controls were similar with respect to the number of people and the number of children under five living in the household, as well the number of people sharing the child's bedroom. After controlling for potential confounders, no evidence of an association between number of persons sharing the child's bedroom and lower respiratory disease was identified when all cases were compared with their controls. However, when two categories of cases were distinguished (infections, asthma) and each category compared separately with their controls, crowding appeared to be associated with a 60% reduction in the incidence of asthma but with 2 1/2-fold increase in the incidence of lower respiratory tract infections (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that household crowding places young children at risk of acute lower respiratory infection but may protect against asthma. This result is consistent with the hygiene hypothesis.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations192
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public HealthSame topicPediatric health and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207