Assessment of impairment/disability due to occupational asthma through a multidimensional approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Subjects with occupational asthma (OA) are often left with permanent sequelae after removal from exposure, and assessing their impairment/disability should utilise various tools. The aim of the present study was to examine whether: 1) assessment of inflammation in induced sputum is relevant to impairment; and 2) use of questionnaires on quality of life and psychological factors can be useful for the evaluation of disability. In total, 40 subjects were prospectively assessed for permanent impairment/disability due to OA 2 yrs after cessation of exposure. Impairment was assessed as follows: 1) need for asthma medication; 2) asthma severity; 3) airway calibre and responsiveness; and 4) degree of inflammation in induced sputum. Disability was assessed according to quality of life and psychological distress. There was a significant improvement in airway responsiveness and inflammation from diagnosis to the present assessment. Sputum eosinophils > or =2% and neutrophils >60% were present in eight (20%) and 12 (30%) out of all subjects, respectively, one or the other feature being the only abnormalities in 15% of subjects. Quality of life was moderately affected and there was a prevalence of depression and anxiety close to 50%. In the assessment of subjects with occupational asthma, information on airway inflammation and psychological impacts are relevant to the assessment of impairment/disability, although these findings need further investigation.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".