Eosinophilic activity and bronchial hyperresponsiveness within an asthmatic paediatric population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".