A Longitudinal, Population-Based, Cohort Study of Childhood Asthma Followed to Adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The outcome of childhood asthma in adults has been described in high-risk cohorts, but few population-based studies have reported the risk factors for persistence and relapse. METHODS: We assessed children born from April 1972 through March 1973 in Dunedin, New Zealand, repeatedly from 9 to 26 years of age with questionnaires, pulmonary-function tests, bronchial-challenge testing, and allergy testing. RESULTS: By the age of 26 years, 51.4 percent of 613 study members with complete respiratory data had reported wheezing at more than one assessment. Eighty-nine study members (14.5 percent) had wheezing that persisted from childhood to 26 years of age, whereas 168 (27.4 percent) had remission, but 76 (12.4 percent) subsequently relapsed by the age of 26. Sensitization to house dust mites predicted the persistence of wheezing (odds ratio, 2.41; P=0.001) and relapse (odds ratio, 2.18; P=0.01), as did airway hyperresponsiveness (odds ratio for persistence, 3.00; P<0.001; odds ratio for relapse, 3.03; P<0.001). Female sex predicted the persistence of wheezing (odds ratio, 1.71; P=0.03), as did smoking at the age of 21 years (odds ratio, 1.84; P=0.01). The earlier the age at onset, the greater the risk of relapse (odds ratio, 0.89 per year of increase in the age at onset; P<0.001). Pulmonary function was consistently lower in those with persistent wheezing than in those without persistent wheezing. CONCLUSIONS: In an unselected birth cohort, more than one in four children had wheezing that persisted from childhood to adulthood or that relapsed after remission. The factors predicting persistence or relapse were sensitization to house dust mites, airway hyperresponsiveness, female sex, smoking, and early age at onset. These findings, together with persistently low lung function, suggest that outcomes in adult asthma may be determined primarily in early childhood.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".