Prevalence and Risk Factors of Dyspnea among General Population of Arar City, Kingdom Saudi Arabia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Dyspnea is defined as the subjective experience of breathing discomfort. It is increasing by age and it is a common problem affecting up to half of patients admitted to acute, tertiary care hospitals and also affecting one quarter of ambulatory patients.Study objective: to determine the prevalence and risk factors of dyspnea among general population of Arar city, Northern Border Province, Saudi Arabia. Methods: This was a cross-sectional, community-based study. It was conducted on the general population of Arar city during the period from 1st October, 2015 to 30th June 2016.Data were collected using a predesigned online self- administered questionnaire covering all the needed items. Results: Dyspnea was reported in 35.2% of the study population. Causes of dyspnea reported in our study were mainly of unknown causes (38.6%), bronchial asthma (23.9%), allergy (22.7%), psychological causes (12.5%), cardiac causes (1.1%), and COPD (1.1%).It was more common among females as 44.8% of females reported dyspnea while it was reported in only 31.7% of males. Our study has also shown that dyspnea was most prevalent among the < 20 age group by ratio as 52.6% of them reported dyspnea. However, 36.1% of subjects aged between 20 and 40 have reported dyspnea. Precipitating causes of dyspnea were found to be mostly due to dust (30.7%), smoking (22.7%), climate changes (14.7%), nervousness (13.6%), specific food/ingested material (11.4%), and excess physical activities (6.8%). It was also founded in our study that 56.5% of participants with family history of dyspnea suffered from dyspnea. While 72.9% of those who did not have a family history of dyspnea did not suffer any dyspnea. Conclusion: Dyspnea was reported in 35.2% of Arar population. Our study showed that dyspnea was more common among females than males. large scale study with detailed investigations about causes and precipitating factors are required.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".