Bronchial Provocation Tests before and after Cessation of Smoking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied the effect of smoking cessation on airway reactivity. We recruited cigarette smokers who were attempting to stop smoking. Entry criteria required each subject to be smoking at least 10 cigarettes each day and report a chronic cough. Exclusion criteria included significant airflow obstruction or the presence of any medical condition contraindicating challenge testing. Carbachol challenge was performed to assess airway reactivity according to a standardized method. Baseline measurements of forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), specific airway conductance (SGaw) and the provocative dose of carbachol causing a 35% reduction in SGaw (PD35), and a 20% reduction in FEV1 (PD20) were established on entry while each subject was still smoking. Thereafter, repeat measurements were performed after 2 and 6 months of smoking cessation. Adherence to smoking cessation was checked by self-report and verified by measurement of alveolar carbon monoxide levels at each session. Of the 34 subjects who gave consent, 13 relapsed prior to the 2nd month and an additional 8 relapsed before the 6th month. Thirteen of the 34 remained abstinent throughout the 6-month study. All 13 subjects had complete resolution of their cough. The difference in reactivity on entry to that at the 2nd and 6th month was not significant. We conclude that (1) the symptom of chronic cough resolved completely after 2 months of smoking cessation, and (2) airway reactivity remained unchanged at 2 and 6 months of smoking cessation.
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) | 0.000 | 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".