Parents and adolescents preferences for asthma control: a best-worst scaling choice experiment using an orthogonal main effects design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The preferences of parents and children with asthma influence their ability to manage a child's asthma and achieve good control. Potential differences between parents and adolescents with respect to specific parameters of asthma control are not considered in clinical asthma guidelines. The objective was to measure and compare the preferences of parents and adolescents with asthma with regard to asthma control parameters using best worst scaling (BWS). METHODS: Fifty-two parents of children with asthma and 44 adolescents with asthma participated in a BWS study to quantify preferences regarding night-time symptoms, wheezing/chest tightening, changes in asthma medications, emergency visits and physical activity limitations. Conditional logit regression was used to determine each group's utility for each level of each asthma control parameter. RESULTS: Parents displayed the strongest positive preference for the absence of night-time symptoms (β = 2.09, p < 0.00001) and the strongest negative preference for 10 emergency room visits per year (β = -2.15, p < 0.00001). Adolescents displayed the strongest positive preference for the absence of physical activity limitations (β = 2.17, p < 0.00001) and the strongest negative preference for ten physical activity limitations per month (β = -1.97). Both groups were least concerned with changes to medications. CONCLUSION: Parents and adolescents placed different weights on the importance of asthma control parameters and each group displayed unique preferences. Understanding the relative importance placed on each parameter by parents and adolescents is essential for designing effective patient-focused disease management plans.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".