Risk factors for bronchial hyperresponsiveness in late childhood and early adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prevalence of asthma and bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) tends to decrease in male children but increase in female children in the transition from childhood to adolescence. Hormonal factors may be involved in the natural history of asthma during this period. In a prospective study of Montreal school children, the authors examined the determinants of BHR according to the child's pubertal status; 156 male children and 168 female children without a prior diagnosis of asthma were followed for an average of 4.6 yrs. Average age at follow-up was 13.4 yrs and 59% had reached puberty. The prevalence of BHR at follow-up was similar among pre- and postpubertal male children (25.0% versus 29.2%),while BHR was more common among post- compared with prepubertal female children (33.1% versus 14.2%). There were no differences in the determinants (measured in childhood) of BHR at follow-up according to pubertal status. The major determinant of BHR was a positive skin test to dust-mite antigen. BHR was also linked to exposure to gas cooking and the presence of exercise-induced bronchospasm. In conclusion, the results of this study do not support a change in asthma phenotype with the onset of puberty. Pre- and postpuberty, the major determinant of bronchial hyperresponsiveness was skin sensitivity to mite allergen.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".