Asthma and Foreign Body Aspiration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Determine the prevalence of asthma in children who underwent rigid bronchoscopy (RB) for a suspected foreign body aspiration (sFBA) in the tracheobronchial tree, and to identify characteristics of patients who could benefit from a trial of anti‐asthma treatment prior to undergoing a diagnostic bronchoscopy. Method Retrospective chart review of children with sFBA in the tracheobronchial tree who underwent RB at the Montreal Children’s Hospital (2001‐2009). Patient characteristics such as delay between initial choking episode and first otolaryngology evaluation, clinical findings, radiologic findings, bronchoscopic findings, and history of asthma were analyzed. Results A total of 55 children underwent a RB for sFBA. Foreign bodies (FB) were found in 36 of these, one of which was asthmatic (2.78%, P <. 05). In the 19 children who had a negative bronchoscopy (no FB), four were asthmatics (21.1%, P <. 05). The mean time from the suspected initial choking event to the first otolaryngology evaluation was 27 days in asthmatics (range, 5 hours‐90 days; median, 14 days), whereas it was 7.2 days in nonasthmatics (range, 0.5 hours‐120 days; median, 16 hours). Otherwise, clinical and radiological findings were not significantly different in the asthmatic and non‐asthmatic groups. Conclusion Asthmatic children with sFBA are significantly more likely to have a negative bronchoscopy than non‐asthmatics, especially when there is a delay between the suspected choking episode and the first otolaryngology evaluation. Therefore, a trial of anti‐asthma treatment prior to performing a diagnostic bronchoscopy in this subgroup of patients is justified.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".