A child's asthma quality of life rating does not significantly influence management of their asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children of parents who perceive their children have increased asthma severity use more medical services and reliever medication. METHODS: A randomized control trial of the Roaring Adventures of Puff (RAP) education program was completed among 287 grade 2-5 children with asthma. Parents and children completed a quality of life (QOL) questionnaire pre-intervention, 6 and 12 months post-intervention. We hypothesized that RAP altered how parent's assessed their child's QOL with a resultant change in asthma management. RESULTS: Pre-intervention, parents rated their child's overall QOL higher than their child (parent 5.41 [95% CI 5.24, 5.58] vs. child 4.54 [95% CI 4.32, 4.75]; P < 0.001: paired t-test). For every point increase in the parent's overall QOL score, the child was 36% less likely to receive inhaled corticosteroids in the prior 2 weeks (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.46, 0.88; P = 0.024) and 46% less likely to have missed school due to asthma in the prior 6 months (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36, 0.82; P = 0.016: logistic regression). The child's QOL assessment, beyond that provided by their parent, was not associated with the asthma management outcomes examined. The RAP program decreased parent's symptoms QOL assessment by an improvement of 0.45 on a 7-point scale greater than control at 6 months (95% CI -0.81, -0.09; P = 0.06). Moreover, the RAP interaction on parent symptoms rating was important in determining whether the child received a short-acting beta-agonist in the prior 2 weeks (P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Parent's QOL perception, and not the child's, is associated with asthma management. RAP decreased the parent's QOL symptoms assessment and was important in determining the child's asthma management.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".