MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039394640 · doi:10.1016/j.aller.2011.06.003

Eosinophilic activity and bronchial hyperresponsiveness within an asthmatic paediatric population

2011· article· en· W2039394640 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Amel Boumendjel, A. Tridon, Mahfoud Messarah, Sylvie Ughetto, S. Meharzi, Mohamed Salah Boulakoud

Bibliographic record

VenueAllergologia et Immunopathologia · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Universitaire de la Francophonie
KeywordsMedicineAsthmaEosinophiliaSerologyBronchial hyperresponsivenessEosinophil cationic proteinImmunologyPopulationEosinophilImmunoglobulin EPopulation studyBronchial hyperreactivityInternal medicineAntibodyRespiratory diseaseEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Our study aims to assess the importance of serum eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) levels as a non-invasive marker of bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) in children with asthma, and may predict objectively the asthmatic severity and sensitivities. METHODS: This study, which was carried out on 75 asthmatic patients from a paediatric population (average age: nine years old, sex-ratio M/F: 1.64), is based on both interrogation conducted by the clinician and biological explorations, essentially serological testing of ECP and eosinophilia determination, as well as the measurement of serological IgE amounts. RESULTS: The analysis of the questionnaires and the biological results allowed us to evaluate the clinico-biological relations within this population. ECP, more than eosinophilia, proves to be a relevant marker of asthma severity (p<0.05) and sensitivities within this given population (r=0.65). CONCLUSION: We were able to show that the evaluation of the serological levels of ECP seems to be a good biological marker of asthma.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAllergologia et ImmunopathologiaSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207