The effect of multiple allergen immunotherapy on exhaled nitric oxide in adults with allergic rhinitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a lack of objective measures of the clinical efficacy of allergen immunotherapy which relies on patients' perception about the effect of this treatment. We studied whether the fraction of exhaled nitric oxide is affected by multiple allergen immunotherapy in polysensitized adult subjects with allergic rhinitis. We also looked for associations between exhaled nitric oxide and subjects' demographics, symptom scores, and pulmonary function tests. METHODS: Twenty adult, polysensitized subjects with seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis who chose to undergo allergen immunotherapy were enrolled. They were evaluated at baseline, and 4, 8, 12, 24, and 52 weeks later. Exhaled nitric oxide was reported as the mean of triplicate determinations. FINDINGS: Our results indicate that multiple allergen immunotherapy did not affect exhaled nitric oxide levels and such levels did not correlate with subjects' demographics and pulmonary function tests. However, exhaled nitric oxide was associated with rhinoconjuctivitis and asthma symptom scores at the end of the study. CONCLUSIONS: In polysensitized adult subjects with allergic rhinitis, exhaled nitric oxide levels are unaffected by multiple allergen immunotherapy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".