β2-Agonist Tolerance and Exercise-induced Bronchospasm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of regular inhaled beta-agonist on the treatment of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction was studied. Eight subjects with exercise-induced bronchoconstriction took 1 week each of salbutamol 200 microg qid or placebo in a random-order, double-blind, crossover study. They then withheld this treatment for 8 hours before performing a dry-air, sub-maximal exercise challenge at a work-rate previously shown to induce a 15% fall in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1). Five minutes after exercise, they inhaled salbutamol 100, 100, and 200 microg at 5-minute intervals. The mean pre-exercise FEV1 was similar on both study days. However, pretreatment for 1 week with salbutamol led to a significantly greater fall in FEV1 after exercise. The FEV1 remained lower than during the placebo arm despite the administration of salbutamol after exercise. This difference persisted 25 minutes after exercise. It is concluded that regular beta-agonist treatment leads to increased exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and a suboptimal bronchodilator response to beta-agonist. The data suggest that previous regular beta-agonist treatment may lead to a failure to respond to emergency bronchodilator treatment during an acute asthma attack and support current opinion that regular short-acting beta-agonist therapy should not be used to treat asthma.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".