Allergen sensitization affected the change trend of prevalence of symptoms of rhinitis coexisting with wheeze among adolescents in Guangzhou City from 1994 to 2009
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies have assessed the time trends of prevalence of symptoms of rhinitis (SR) with wheezing and their associations in Chinese adolescents. OBJECTIVE: To explore the trend of prevalence of SR with wheezing and allergen sensitization in adolescents during the past 15 years. METHODS: A total of 6928 adolescents aged 13-14 years in 2009 were recruited for the study using the Phase III Protocol of the International Study of Asthma and Allergic disease in Childhood (ISAAC) and allergic sensitization to seven inhalant allergens in 2531 was assessed by skin prick test in 2010. The results were compared to those obtained in the Phase I (1994/95) and III (2001/02) ISAAC studies. RESULTS: The prevalence of 'SR ever' and 'current symptoms of rhino-conjunctivitis' increased from 46.3% and 8.7% in 1994 to 53.2% and 11.1% in 2001 (p < 0.001), respectively, and remained stable at 52.6% and 10.4% in 2009 (p > 0.05). The prevalence of 'SR ever and wheeze ever' and 'SR ever and current wheeze' increased from 6.2% and 3.4% in 1994 to 8.6% and 4.8% in 2001 (p < 0.001) to 10.9% and 5.9% in 2009 (p < 0.05). The sensitization rate to common inhaled allergens was higher in 2010 than in 2002 (p < 0.001). Sensitization to house dust mites (HDMs) was associated with increases in the prevalence of SR (OR, 2.06-2.86), especially with coexistence of wheeze (OR, 6.07-7.43). CONCLUSION: The prevalence of symptoms of rhinitis and coexistence with wheezing has increased significantly since 1994. Sensitization to HDMs is the main risk factor associated with this increase.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".