Effect of childhood BMI on asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control studies
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Asthma is a multifactorial syndrome that threatens the health of children. Body mass index (BMI) might be one of the potential factors but the evidence is controversial. The aim of this study is to perform a comprehensive meta-analysis to investigate the association between asthma and BMI. METHODS: and Cochrane Q statistics. RESULTS: After reviewing 2511 articles, 16 studies were eligible for meta-analysis according to inclusion/exclusion criteria. A meta-analysis from 11 case-control studies revealed OR of asthma and overweight as OR = 1.64; (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.13-2.38) and from 14 case-control studies, OR for asthma and obesity was OR = 1.92 (95% CI: 1.39-2.65), which indicated that risk of asthma in overweight and obese children and adolescence was significantly higher (1.64 and 1.92 times) than that of individuals with (p-value < 0.01 for underweight/normal weight in both cases). Furthermore, there was a significant relationship between asthma and BMI > 85 percentile according to SMD SMD = 0.21; (95%CI: 0.03-0.38; p-value = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: The results showed a significant relationship between BMI (obesity/overweight) and asthma among children and adolescents. It is important to study the confounding factors that affect the relationship between asthma and BMI in future epidemiological researches.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 it