General and abdominal obesity and incident asthma in adults: the HUNT study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Measures of body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference define general obesity and abdominal obesity respectively. While high BMI has been established as a risk factor for asthma in adults, waist circumference has seldom been investigated. To determine the association between BMI, waist circumference and incident asthma in adults, we conducted a prospective study (n=23,245) in a population living in Nord-Trøndelag, Norway in 1995-2008. Baseline BMI and waist circumference were measured and categorised as general obesity (BMI ≥30.0 kg·m(2)) and abdominal obesity (waist circumference ≥88 cm in females and ≥102 cm in males). Incident asthma was self-reported new-onset cases during an 11-yr follow-up period. Odds ratios for asthma associated with obesity were calculated using multivariable logistic regression. General obesity was a risk factor for asthma in females (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.52-2.52) and males (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.30-2.59). In females, after additional adjustment for BMI, abdominal obesity remained a risk factor for asthma development (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.04-2.05). Abdominal obesity seems to increase the risk of incident asthma in females in addition to BMI, indicating that using both measures of BMI and waist circumference in females may be a superior clinical assessment for asthma risk than any measure alone.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".