MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014266837 · doi:10.1164/ajrccm.161.5.9908119

Relative Scarcity of Asthma and Atopy among Rural Adolescents Raised on a Farm

2000· article· en· W2014266837 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre Ernst, Yvon Cormier

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWheezeAtopyMedicineAsthmaAllergyOdds ratioBronchial hyperresponsivenessPediatricsMethacholineImmunologyRespiratory diseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We determined the prevalence of markers of atopy and asthma among 1, 199 rural secondary school students ages 12 to 19 yr. Subjects identified as having been raised on a farm and half as many subjects without regular exposure to a farming environment from the same school class completed a respiratory symptom questionnaire and underwent allergy skin tests and a methacholine bronchoprovocation test. Current wheeze, airways hyperresponsiveness (AHR), and skin test positivity to inhaled allergens were all significantly less common among adolescents raised on the farm and these differences were especially pronounced in girls. After adjusting for gender and current smoking, the odds ratios for being raised on a farm were: 0. 70 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.95) for current wheeze; 0.59 (95% CI 0.37 to 0. 95) for asthma, defined as the concomitant occurrence of wheeze and AHR; and 0.58 (95% CI 0.46 to 0.75) for atopy defined as a positive reaction to any one of 24 common inhaled allergens. These associations were also not significantly altered by adjusting for the difference in the number of siblings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations321
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial ExposureFrench-language works237,207