Quality control chart method for analyzing PEF variability in occupational asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Asthma is the most common occupational respiratory disorder in the industrialized world. In this research we investigated the effectiveness of quality control chart as a method to explore the work-relatedness of asthma using peak expiratory flow (PEF) as the variable of interest. METHOD: PEF measurements were recorded from several workers suspected of having occupational asthma. The measurements were recorded for a period of 2 weeks at work and two away from work. For each subject, average [symbol: see text] quality control chart was developed and analyzed using Shewhart methods. RESULTS: Using the ratio of average daily PEF diurnal variation at work to the baseline average diurnal variation, quality control chart detected and characterized increased variation in PEF between the periods at workplace and away from workplace. This ratio was evaluated at 15% and 20% and compared to the results of the gold standard. A ratio of greater than 15% produced a sensitivity of 94% and specificity of 61%. These results are as good as and in some cases better than the previously published work. CONCLUSIONS: Quality control chart is an effective and inexpensive method for early intervention to detect workers suspected for occupational asthma. Also, the findings in this article are an invitation for further research in occupational asthma using quality control chart methods for other indices of airways obstruction (FEV-1, RAW) or inflammation (NO).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".