An ATS/ERS report: 100 key questions and needs in occupational asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The second Jack Pepys Workshop on Occupational Asthma was held in Toronto, Canada, in May 2004. The present report summarises key questions and research needs as identified by the international participants. The audiotapes from the workshop discussions were summarised by the organising chairs of the Symposium and the resulting document was circulated for input from all invited workshop participants. In total, 100 key questions and research needs were identified. Identified needs included: provision of different definitions depending on the use of data; explanations for differences in frequency studies; and better characterisation of genetic and environmental determinants of occupational asthma. The role of irritants and the pathogenesis of various forms of work-related asthma need further research, and there are also questions and research needs for diagnosis, prevention and understanding of persistence and airway remodelling. In conclusion, although advances have been made in the understanding of occupational asthma and other work-related asthma, further key issues remain that need addressing.
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 | 0.001 | 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".