The Effect of Cigarette Smoking on Lung Function in Young Adults with Asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Life-course persistent asthma and tobacco smoking are risk factors for irreversible airflow obstruction. It is often assumed that smoking and asthma have additive or multiplicative effects on the risk for airflow obstruction, but this has not been demonstrated in prospective studies of children with persistent asthma. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of smoking and asthma on the development of airflow obstruction in a population-based birth cohort followed to age 38 years. METHODS: Reports of childhood asthma from ages 9, 11, and 13 and self-reports of adult asthma at ages 32 and 38 years were used to define childhood-onset persistent asthma (n = 91), late-onset asthma (n = 93), asthma in remission (n = 85), and nonasthmatic (n = 572) phenotypes. Cumulative tobacco smoking histories and spirometry were obtained at ages 18, 21, 26, 32, and 38 years. Analyses were by generalized estimating equations adjusting for childhood spirometry, body mass index, age, and sex. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Smoking history and childhood-onset persistent asthma were both associated with lower FEV1/FVC ratios. Associations between smoking and FEV1/FVC ratios were different between asthma phenotypes (interaction P < 0.001). Smoking was associated with lower prebronchodilator and post-bronchodilator FEV1/FVC ratios among subjects without asthma and those with late-onset or remittent asthma, but smoking was not associated with lower FEV1/FVC ratios among those with childhood-onset persistent asthma. CONCLUSIONS: Childhood-onset persistent asthma is associated with airflow obstruction by mid-adult life, but this does not seem to be made worse by tobacco smoking. We found no evidence that smoking and childhood-persistent asthma have additive or multiplicative effects on airflow obstruction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".