Relationships Between Airway Inflammation And Response To Methacoline Or Eucapnic Voluntary Hyperventilation In Athletes Training In Cold Air
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background : In asthma, airway hyperresponsiveness may be associated with an eosinophilic airway inflammatory process. High-level exercise may induce a systemic and/or airway neutrophilic response. In athletes, the prevalence of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction is higher than that of symptomatic asthma. Purpose : To examine the relationships between responses to EVH (% fall in FEV1), methacholine (PC20) and eosinophilic airway inflammation in athletes training in cold air. Methods : Thirty-one athletes (cross-country skiing, biathlon and speed skating-long track) had a medical examination, a questionnaire on respiratory symptoms, a spirometry, a methacholine provocation test, skin prick tests for common respiratory allergens, EVH test and induced sputum analysis. Results : IS analysis revealed a low eosinophilic count (mean % cells ± SEM: 0.82 ± 1.9 %) and a mild neutrophilia (46.8 ± 21.3 %). PC20 was positively correlated with the fall in FEV1 after EVH (r = 0.41, p = 0.02) and with the % of eosinophils (r = 0.58, p = 0.01) in sputum. The fall in FEV1 after EVH was also positively correlated with eosinophil count (r = 0.72, p = 0.001). There was no relationships between these parameters and IS neutrophil count. Conclusion :Response to methacholine and EVH in athletes correlates with the degree of eosinophilic airway inflammation, although this last is small.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".