MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2410542273 · doi:10.13075/ijomeh.1896.00676

Update on work-exacerbated asthma

2015· review· en· W2410542273 on OpenAlexaff
Susan M. Tarlo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational exposure and asthma
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsthmaExacerbationMedicineOccupational asthmaSocioeconomic statusAsthma exacerbationsIntensive care medicinePopulationPrimary carePediatricsPhysical therapyEnvironmental healthFamily medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Work-exacerbated asthma (WEA) is the term used to describe the worsening of asthma related to work but not the causation of asthma by work. It is common and has been reported to occur for 21.5% of working asthmatics on average. The frequency and severity may range from a single mild exacerbation that may lead to no time lost at work up to daily or severe exacerbations that may require a permanent change in work. Reports from general population surveys and primary care settings include more patients with short-term or mild exacerbations while those from tertiary care settings reflect the more severe end of the spectrum of severity or frequency, with socioeconomic outcomes that are similar to those of occupational asthma. In the minority of patients with the WEA, whose asthma starts while working, the differential diagnosis includes sensitizer-induced or possible irritant-induced occupational asthma. Optimizing work exposures and asthma management may improve outcome and prevent exacerbations. Worker education and screening of working asthmatics by primary health care workers may also prevent morbidity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental HealthSame topicOccupational exposure and asthmaFrench-language works237,207