The course of asthma: A population‐based 10‐year study examining asthma remission in children diagnosed with asthma in preschool
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The natural course of asthma may differ depending on the age of onset. OBJECTIVE: To investigate predictors of asthma remission with a focus on the age of asthma onset. METHODS: The study was a retrospective birth cohort of children with asthma in Saskatchewan, Canada. Using the Saskatchewan Ministry of Health databases, we identified children with a diagnosis of asthma in the first 6 years of life and who had at least 10 years of follow-up after diagnosis (n = 22 563). Of these, we included 6393 children either with persistent asthma (≥1 physician visit or hospitalization for asthma [PVHA] during each year of follow-up) and those who had remission (had PVHA in the first year after diagnosis but at some point during the follow-up no longer received PVHA until end of the study). We used survival analysis to examine associations between remission and age of asthma onset. RESULTS: Of the study participants, 87.2% had early-onset (≤3 years) and 12.8% had late-onset (4-6 years) asthma. Over the 10-years of follow-up, the rate of asthma remission was 37 per 100 person-years. Early-onset asthma (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.10; 95%confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.20), being female (HR = 1.12; 95%CI: 1.07-1.18), living in a rural (HR = 1.20; 95%CI: 1.14-1.27) and medium urban (HR = 1.16; 95%CI: 1.08-1.26) location were positively associated with remission while history of atopy decreased likelihood of remission (HR = 0.73; 95%CI: 0.54-0.97). CONCLUSION: Most children with asthma experienced remission, especially those with the onset of symptoms within the first 3 years of life.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".