MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098650765 · doi:10.1136/thx.2006.061572

Development and validation of database indexes of asthma severity and control

2007· article· en· W2098650765 on OpenAlexaffabout
Faranak Firoozi, Catherine Lemière, Marie-France Beauchesne, A. Forget, Lucie Blais

Bibliographic record

VenueThorax · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsthmaDatabaseCohortEpidemiologyMedical prescriptionPediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The use of administrative databases to perform epidemiological studies in asthma has increased in recent years. The absence of clinical parameters to measure the level of asthma severity and control is a major limitation of database studies. A study was undertaken to develop and validate two database indexes to measure the control and severity of asthma. METHODS: Database indexes of asthma severity and control were derived from definitions in the Canadian Asthma Consensus Guidelines based on dispensed prescriptions and on medical services recorded in two large administrative databases from the Canadian province of Québec (Régie de l'Assurance Maladie du Québec (RAMQ) and MED-ECHO) over 12 months. The database indexes of asthma severity and control were validated against the pulmonary function test results of 71 patients with asthma randomly selected from two asthma clinics, and they were also applied to a cohort of patients with asthma followed up for 139 283 person-years selected from the RAMQ and MED-ECHO databases between 1 January 1997 and 31 December 2004. RESULTS: According to the database indexes, 49.3%, 29.6% and 21.1% of patients recruited at the asthma clinics were found to have mild, moderate and severe asthma, respectively, while 53.5% were found to have controlled asthma. The mean predicted value of the forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) ranged from 89.8% for mild asthma to 61.5% for severe asthma (p<0.001), whereas the range from controlled to uncontrolled asthma was 89.5% to 67.3% (p<0.001). The ratio of the FEV(1) to the forced vital capacity (FEV(1)/FVC ratio) measured in 56 patients ranged from 75.8% for mild asthma to 61.8% for severe asthma (p = 0.030), whereas the range from controlled to uncontrolled asthma was 75.3% to 65.7% (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: In the absence of clinical data, these database indexes could be used in epidemiological studies to assess the severity and control of 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.099
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.099
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations89
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThoraxSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207