Bibliographic record
Abstract
Impairment in adult lung function has been associated with increased mortality for a wide range of diseases1 and increased morbidity including risk of chronic pulmonary obstructive disease (COPD∥.2 Decrements in lung function have been linked to a number of factors including cigarette smoking, air pollution, lower respiratory tract infection and asthma diagnosis.3 In addition, prenatal factors seem to play an important part in determining adult lung function. Cigarette smoking is associated with the greatest effect on adult lung function and decline in lung function, with smoking associated with a 28–50 ml/year loss in forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1).4 This effect on FEV1 seems to be influenced by gender because the effect is greater among adolescent girls than boys5 but reverses in middle age where effects are greater in men than women.4 Both pregnancy and early infancy6–9 have been shown to be risk periods for effects of environmental cigarette smoke. Other work has suggested that exposure to cigarette smoke may be particularly detrimental to lung growth in populations who are already disadvantaged owing to poor rates of fetal growth.10 Cigarette smoke has been shown to have a direct detrimental effect on lung function at birth11 and in the early years.8 However, the question arises of which period is poses the highest risk, fetal or the postnatal. Air …
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.005 |
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".