Changes in Smoking Status Affect Women More than Men: Results of the Lung Health Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lung Health Study participants were smokers aged 35-60 years with mild lung function impairment who participated in a 5-year, 10-center (nine in the United States, one in Canada) clinical trial in 1986-1994. The authors compared the relation of randomized treatment assignments and of smoking history during the study with changes in lung function between men and women. Spirometry was performed annually, and 3,348 men and 1,998 women attended the follow-up clinic visit that included spirometry at year 5. This paper reports on an analysis of changes in lung function by gender, treatment group, and three smoking history categories: sustained quitters, intermittent quitters, and continuing smokers. Among participants who quit smoking in the first year, mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) expressed as a percentage of the predicted value of FEV(1 )given the person's age, height, gender, and race (FEV(1)%) increased more in women (3.7% of predicted) than in men (1.6% of predicted) (p < 0.001). Across the 5-year follow-up period, among sustained quitters, women gained more in FEV(1)% of predicted than did men. Methacholine reactivity was more strongly related to rates of decline in women than in men (p < 0.001). Therefore, among persons at risk for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, smoking cessation has an even clearer advantage for women than it does for men.
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.
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 | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it