Perceived Control and Immune and Pulmonary Outcomes in Children With Asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study tested the relationships between perceived control and biological processes relevant to asthma in children. Methods: Forty children diagnosed with asthma completed the Children's Health Locus of Control (CHLC) scale. Participants also completed pulmonary function testing, measuring forced vital capacity (FVC), and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1). Blood was drawn to assess immune markers associated with asthma. Specifically, stimulated production of the cytokines interleukin 4 (IL-4), interleukin-5 (IL-5), interleukin-13 (IL-13), interferon-γ (IFN-γ), as well as eosinophil count, was measured. At home, participants completed peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) measures to monitor their daily pulmonary function. Results: Higher levels of perceived control were associated with significantly better FVC, FEV1, and PEFR variability. Higher levels of perceived control were also associated with decreased production of asthma-related cytokines, including IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13. Conclusion: These results suggest that psychological processes such as perceived control may play an important role in asthma-related biological processes among children with asthma. IL = interleukin; IFN = interferon; PEFR = peak expiratory flow rate; FVC = forced vital capacity; FEV = forced expiratory volume; PBMC = peripheral blood mononuclear cells; PMA = phorbol myristate acetate; INO = ionomycin; CHLC = Children's Health Locus of Control.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".