The most fundamental change in asthma management in 30 years?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We would like to raise our considerable concern regarding a potential major change in the management of exacerbations of asthma which is soon to be discussed in the European Union (EU). The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) has recently changed their recommendation regarding management of patients with mild asthma. Instead of using only short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) as needed, GINA suggests that all patients should also be using inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) simultaneously. This was based on a few studies that have used “as needed” ICS/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) for acute asthma. A group of authors has hailed this change as “the most fundamental change in asthma management in 30 years” and explained, in detail, the reasons for the change in an article recently published in the European Respiratory Journal [1]. Changes in GINA guidelines should be confirmed by an independent body of experts in asthma management
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.026 | 0.027 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".