IgE serum concentration against airborne fungi in children with respiratory allergies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate total and specific E immunoglobulin (IgE) antibody concentrations in underage subjects with respiratory allergic diseases. METHODS: This study was a transversal-type study in 100 underage subjects between 4 and 14 years old, with asthma and/or allergic rhinitis. Total and specific IgE were quantified for airborne fungi in the city of São Luís, Maranhão, Brazil. Five distinct regions-North, South, Center, East and West-were selected so fungi could be collected monthly for 1 year. Twenty genera were identified. Aspergillus, Penicillium, Fusarium and Neurospora were selected for the preparation of sensitizing antigens from ELISA dishes. IgE total concentrations were estimated using the same method. RESULTS: IgE total serum concentration was increased in 97 % of the atopic subjects: 75 % of the subjects presented increased IgE anti-Aspergillus concentrations, 87 % presented IgE anti-Penicillium, 45 % presented IgE anti-Fusarium, and 46 % presented IgE anti-Neurospora. CONCLUSIONS: Atopic subjects presented simultaneous IgE total and specific elevations for the tested fungi, possibly due to polysensitization caused by the presence of fungi in all of the areas all year. However, determining the clinical significance of the results was not yet possible because most of the data were isolated variables.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".