Dalhousie dyspnea scales: Pictorial scales to measure dyspnea during induced bronchoconstriction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to validate our Dalhousie Dyspnea Scales in children referred for histamine bronchoprovocation challenge. Seventy-four children rated their dyspnea after each FEV1 measurement following inhalation of doubling histamine concentrations from 0.125 to 8.0 mg/ml by the standard tidal breathing method. Serial FEV1 and dyspnea rating using the Dalhousie Dyspnea Scales were recorded and Kendall's tau was computed for dyspnea rating versus fall in FEV1. Subjects were split into those with positive (ΔFEV1 ≥ 20% with PC20 ≤ 8 mg/ml) or negative histamine challenge test. During histamine inhalation, dyspnea ratings on each of the subscales rose as FEV1 fell across subjects, whether or not they were histamine-responsive (main effect), and then fell dramatically following relief of induced obstruction by bronchodilator. The Dalhousie Dyspnea Scales are useful and accurate tools to measure dyspnea due to bronchoconstriction in children. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2006; 41:1182–1187. © 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".