Age of Asthma Onset and Obesity in Canadian Asthmatics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether age of asthma onset has an impact on the previously described relationship between asthma and obesity. METHODS: We used Cycle 1.1 (2000/1) of the Canadian Community Health Survey, a nationally representative health survey, which included 6871 participants with asthma. Body mass index was used to categorize participants as normal weight (18.5-24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25-29.9 kg/m2), and obese (≥30 kg/m2). Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of overweight and obesity by selfreported age of asthma onset, after accounting for age, socioeconomic status, daily fruit and vegetable consumption, and smoking status. RESULTS: In fully adjusted models, females diagnosed with asthma in mid (21-44 y) and later (45-64 y) life were 43% (OR= 1.43, 1.08-1.90) and 56% (OR= 1.56, 1.00-2.44) more likely to be obese than those diagnosed in childhood (0-11y), respectively. Only males diagnosed with asthma in adolescence (12-20 y) were at elevated odds of obesity (OR= 1.58, 95% CI: 1.03-2.43), compared to asthmatics diagnosed during childhood. CONCLUSIONS: Age of asthma onset does not have a uniform impact on the asthma-obesity relationship in males and females. Nonetheless, lifestyle interventions may be an important component of asthma management in certain age of onset cohorts.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".