The Rising Prevalence of Asthma: True Increase, Diagnostic Exchange or Diagnostic Accuracy?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the midst of frequent reports about "the asthma epidemic," results from a number of studies by the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy have shown stable or decreasing prevalence of an overall indicator of respiratory diseases which includes asthma.To resolve these apparently contrary findings, we conducted a time trend analysis using administrative data.Results revealed significant potential for diagnostic exchange: asthma prevalence increased, but that of bronchitis decreased. RésuméDans le contexte des fréquents rapports indiquant une « épidémie d' asthme », les résultats de plusieurs études effectuées par le Centre des politiques de santé du Manitoba montrent une prévalence stable ou en déclin d'un indicateur global des maladies respiratoires, y compris l' asthme.Afin de résoudre la contradiction apparente de ces résultats, nous avons effectué une analyse évolutive des tendances au moyen de données administratives.Les résultats révèlent une forte possibilité de substitution de diagnostic : la prévalence de l' asthme a augmenté, mais celle de la bronchite a diminué.
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 | 0.064 | 0.225 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".