Sex Differences in the Effects of Inhaled Corticosteroids on Weight Gain among Patients with Asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Studies have shown that asthma and asthma exacerbations are related to body weight and that this relationship might be sex-specific. While oral corticosteroids have been associated with weight gain, little is known about the effect of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use on short-term weight gain. The purpose of the present study was to examine whether ICSs would be associated with weight gain among asthmatic patients.Methods. A total of 180 adult patients with physician-diagnosed asthma provided details of their medical history and demographic information, along with height and weight at baseline and at one year. Weight change was defined as follow-up minus baseline weight. General linear models were used to assess the relationship between ICS dose (fluticasone propionate equivalent) and sex.Results. Significant main effects of sex ( P=.005 ) and ICS dose ( P=.036 ) and an interaction effect of sex and ICS dose ( P=.003 ) on weight change were observed. Further analysis of the interaction indicated that women had greater weight gain, while men had decreased weight with increased ICS dose.Conclusions. Findings suggest that ICSs may trigger weight gain in females and highlight the need for studies to confirm this relationship and examine the potential underlying mechanisms.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".