Atopy, Obesity, and Asthma in Adults: The Humboldt Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obesity appears more strongly associated with asthma in women than in men. It is hypothesized that a stronger linkage of obesity with nonatopic asthma than with atopic asthma may explain the sex difference. That being the case, we might hypothesize a stronger association between obesity and asthma in nonatopic individuals than in atopic ones. In this analysis, we examined the association between obesity and asthma in atopic and nonatopic people separately. A total of 1997 residents aged 18 to 79 years who participated in the 2003-2004 Humboldt study were included in the analysis. Body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference were objectively measured. Allergy skin tests were conducted to determine atopic sensitization. Respiratory allergy and physician diagnosed asthma were self-reported. Overall, 8% reported having asthma, 30% had atopic sensitization as determined by allergy skin tests, 31% reported a history of respiratory allergy, and 35% were obese defined as BMI equal to or larger than 30 kg/m(2). Compared to those with a BMI <25 kg/m(2), the odds ratio for asthma for the nonatopic subjects of those with a BMI of at least 30.0 kg/m(2) was 2.01 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13, 3.59] after adjustment for sex and age. The association between obesity and asthma was not statistically significant in atopic subjects. The adjusted odds ratios for obesity versus normal weight were 2.56 (95% CI: 1.07, 6.12) and 1.76 (95% CI: 1.04, 3.01) for those without and with a history of respiratory allergy, respectively. The association of asthma with waist circumference was not statistically significant in all the subgroups defined by atopy and respiratory allergy. The data suggested a stronger association between obesity and asthma among nonatopic people than among atopic people.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".