Symptom Perception during Acute Bronchoconstriction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hypothesis underlying the present study was that some of the variability in symptom intensity seen during acute bronchoconstriction may result from varying intensities of several stimuli yielding several sensations that can be identified by specific descriptive expressions (symptoms). A total of 232 subjects inhaled methacholine in doubling concentrations to a 20% decrease in FEV(1), or 64 mg/ml. The study identified the prevalence of dyspnea, nonspecific discomfort associated with the act of breathing, and 10 specific symptom expressions. Each symptom intensity was rated in Borg scale units. The contribution of the specific symptoms to the intensity of dyspnea is illustrated in the following equation (r = 0. 84): Dyspnea = 0.44 + 0.19 Difficult breathing + 0.41 Chest tightness + 0.20 Breathlessness + 0.14 Labored breathing + 0.11 Chest pain. Dyspnea was more intense with broncho-constriction, baseline pulmonary impairment, weight, and sex (being female). Dyspnea was less intense with age (being older) and as airway responsiveness to methacholine increased (p < 0.05 for all factors). Chest tightness and chest pain were at polar extremes on the discrimination scale, i.e., easily discriminated; chest tightness, difficult and labored breathing were not easily discriminated.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".