Exhaled nitric oxide and asthma control: a longitudinal study in unselected patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Controlled studies have shown that monitoring of the exhaled nitric oxide fraction (F(eNO)) improves asthma management. However, the studies seldom consider the full range of patients seen in clinical practise. In the present study, the ability of F(eNO) to reflect asthma control over time is investigated in a regular clinical setting, and meaningful F(eNO) cut-off points and changes are identified. Answers to the Asthma Control Questionnaire and F(eNO) were recorded at least once in 341 unselected asthma patients. The whole population and subgroups were considered, i.e. both inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-naïve and low or high-to-medium (</= or >500 mug beclomethasone dipropionate equivalents.day(-1)) ICS-dose groups. An F(eNO) decrease <40% or increase <30% precludes asthma control optimisation or deterioration, respectively (negative predictive value 79 and 82%, respectively). In the present study's low-dose group, a decrease >40% indicated asthma control optimisation (positive predictive value (PPV) 83%). In ICS-naïve patients, F(eNO) >35 ppb predicted asthma control improvement in response to ICS (PPV 68%). In most cases, forced expiratory volume in one second assessments were not useful. In conclusion, in a given patient, exhaled nitric oxide fraction was found to be significantly related to asthma control over time. The overall ability of exhaled nitric oxide fraction to reflect asthma control was reduced in patients using high doses of inhaled corticosteroids. Forced expiratory volume in one second had little additional value in assessing asthma control.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".