Asthma in Adolescents: A Randomized, Controlled Trial of an Asthma Program for Adolescents and Young Adults with Severe Asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Asthma is common and is often poorly controlled in adolescent subjects. OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of an age-specific asthma program on asthma control, particularly on exacerbations of asthma requiring emergency department treatment, and on the quality of life of adolescents with asthma. METHODS: The present randomized, controlled trial included patients who were 15 to 20 years of age and had visited emergency departments for management of their asthma. The interventional group attended an age-specific asthma program that included assessment, education and management by a team of asthma educators, respiratory therapists and respiratory physicians. In the control group, spirometry was performed, and the patients continued to receive usual care from their regular physicians. The outcomes were assessed by a questionnaire six months after entry into the study. RESULTS: Ninety-three subjects entered the study and were randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. Of these, only 62 patients were available for review after six months. Subjects in both the control and the intervention groups showed a marked improvement in their level of asthma control, reflected primarily by a 73% reduction in the rate of emergency department attendance for asthma. Other indexes of disease control, including disease-specific quality of life, as assessed by questionnaires, were improved. There was, however, no discernible difference between the subjects in the two groups, with the exception of an improvement in favour of the intervention group in the symptom (actual difference 0.7, P=0.048) and emotional (actual difference 0.8, P=0.028) domains of the asthma quality of life questionnaire. The overall quality of life score favoured the intervention group by a clinically relevant difference of 0.6, but this difference did not reach statistical significance (P=0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Although all subjects demonstrated a significant improvement in asthma control and quality of life, the improvement attributable to this intervention was limited to two domains in disease-specific quality of life.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".