The Relationship Between Birth Weight and Childhood Asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Because obesity promotes inflammation and imposes mechanical constraints to the airways, a high birth weight may be a risk factor for asthma in childhood. However, to our knowledge, few studies have examined this potential relationship. OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between high birth weight and risk of emergency visits for asthma during childhood. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING: Alberta, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: All neonates born at term (> or =37 weeks) between April 1, 1985, and March 31, 1988, in Alberta (N = 83,595). We divided the cohort into birth-weight categories: low (<2.5 kg), normal (2.5-4.5 kg), or high (>4.5 kg). The cohort was observed prospectively for 10 years.Main Outcome Measure Comparison of risk of emergency visits for asthma over 10 years across the birth-weight categories. RESULTS: Neonates born with a high birth weight had a significantly increased risk of emergency visits for asthma during childhood compared with neonates born with a normal birth weight (relative risk [RR], 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.29). The relationship between birth weight and emergency visits for asthma beyond a birth weight of 4.5 kg was linear, such that every increment of 0.10 kg in birth weight was associated with an additional 10% (95% CI, 2%-19%) increase in the risk of emergency visits for asthma. Other factors associated with an elevated risk for emergency asthma visits during childhood included male sex (RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.22-1.30), aboriginal status (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.11-1.29), and low-income status (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06-1.16). CONCLUSIONS: A high, but not low, birth weight is a risk factor for increased emergency visits during childhood. The risk increases linearly beyond a birth weight of 4.5 kg.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".