Review: long term use of common medications for asthma reduces exacerbations in adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sin DD, Man J, Sharpe H, et al . Pharmacological management to reduce exacerbations in adults with asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 2004;292:367–76.[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] Q In adults with asthma, does long term use of common pharmacological antiasthmatic agents reduce rates of exacerbations? ### ![Graphic][5] Data sources: Medline, EMBASE/Excerpta Medica, and the Cochrane databases (all from 1980 to April 2004); bibliographies of relevant articles; and experts. ### ![Graphic][6] Study selection and assessment: randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (published in English) that lasted ⩾3 months, evaluated common pharmacological treatments for adults (>19 y of age) with asthma, and reported relevant outcomes. Study quality was assessed using the Jadad scale. ### ![Graphic][7] Outcomes: exacerbation rates and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1). 4 categories of pharmacological medications were evaluated. Meta-analyses were done using a random effects model when significant data heterogeneity was detected. (1) Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DJAMA%26rft.stitle%253DJAMA%26rft.aulast%253DSin%26rft.auinit1%253DD.%2BD.%26rft.volume%253D292%26rft.issue%253D3%26rft.spage%253D367%26rft.epage%253D376%26rft.atitle%253DPharmacological%2BManagement%2Bto%2BReduce%2BExacerbations%2Bin%2BAdults%2BWith%2BAsthma%253A%2BA%2BSystematic%2BReview%2Band%2BMeta-analysis%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1001%252Fjama.292.3.367%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F15265853%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.292.3.367&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=15265853&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febnurs%2F8%2F1%2F14.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000222693500023&link_type=ISI [5]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [6]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [7]: /embed/inline-graphic-3.gif
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 | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".