Obesity May Increase the Incidence of Asthma in Women but Not in Men: Longitudinal Observations from the Canadian National Population Health Surveys
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
To investigate the possibility of gender specificity for the effect of body mass index (BMI) on development of asthma, the authors used the longitudinal data from the first and second cycles of the National Population Health Survey, conducted in Canada in 1994-1995 and 1996-1997, respectively. Data from 9,149 subjects (4,266 men and 4,883 women) aged 20-64 years who reported no asthma at baseline were used in this analysis. The 2-year cumulative incidence of asthma was estimated by using a bootstrap procedure to take sampling weights and design effects into account. During the 2-year study period, 1.6% of the men and 2.9% of the women developed asthma. Average changes in body weight and BMI over the 2-year observation period were relatively small and were not associated with asthma incidence. However, baseline BMI was a significant predictor for asthma incidence in women. The adjusted odds ratio for women whose baseline BMI was at least 30.0 kg/m(2) versus 20.0-24.9 kg/m(2) was 1.9 (95% confidence interval: 1.1, 3.4), whereas the corresponding odds ratio of 1.1 (95% confidence interval: 0.3, 3.6) for men was not significantly different from unity. The authors concluded that obesity was related to development of asthma in women but not in 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 | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| 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 it