Addressing the misdiagnosis of asthma in adults: where does it go wrong?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Asthma is diagnosed based on patients' respiratory symptoms of wheeze, cough, chest tightness and/or dyspnea together with physiologic evidence of variable and reversible expiratory airflow limitation. A high prevalence of overdiagnosis, underdiagnosis and misdiagnosis of adult asthma has been reported in the literature. Areas covered: Misdiagnosis of asthma in adults can occur in the community due to physicians' failure to confirm airflow limitation using spirometry, the relatively poor sensitivity of spirometry to absolutely rule in asthma, the complexity of multiple asthma phenotypes and endotypes, and the inherent day to day variability of asthma symptoms and airflow limitation. Consequences of asthma misdiagnosis to the patient and to the healthcare system include increased medication costs, increased potential side effects related to unnecessary use of medications and lost opportunities to diagnose the true cause of patients' respiratory symptoms. Expert commentary: Here we provide a review of the problem of misdiagnosis of adult asthma and suggestions for how to decrease the risk of misdiagnosis.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".