A population‐based study investigating chronic rhinosinusitis and the incidence of asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory disease of the paranasal sinuses, associated with reduced health-related quality of life and increased utilization of healthcare services. Chronic upper and lower respiratory diseases often coexist, although the extent to which CRS is associated with developing asthma remains unclear. To investigate the effect of CRS on receiving a subsequent diagnosis of asthma, we used data from a previously conducted national, longitudinal survey. METHODS: Respondents from the Canadian National Population Health Survey from 1998/1999 to 2010/2011 were used. Data were analyzed from 11,555 (66.9%) subjects, ≥ 19 years of age and reporting no asthma at baseline. Respondents were reviewed for 12 years to determine the cumulative incidence of asthma. Logistic regression was used to estimate the effect of CRS on the development of asthma, adjusting for age, gender, body mass index, cigarette smoking, and food- or nonfood-related allergies. RESULTS: During the 12-year study period, 6.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] [95% CI]: 5.4%-6.7%) of respondents developed asthma. Baseline CRS (odds ratio [OR]: 2.7, 95% CI: 1.9-3.9), female gender (OR: 1.4, 95% CI: 1.1-1.8), and allergies (OR: 2.6, 95% CI: 2.1 - 3.3) were significantly associated with developing asthma. After adjustment, respondents with CRS were significantly more likely to develop asthma than non-CRS counterparts (OR: 2.0, 95% CI: 1.4-2.9). CONCLUSION: Results indicate that one in 13 individuals with CRS will be subsequently diagnosed with asthma. Given the economic burden and use of healthcare services associated with asthma, providers managing CRS may consider increased awareness and subsequent treatment for asthma. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. Laryngoscope, 126:1296-1302, 2016.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".