The association between concentration of particulate matt(PM2.5) and asthma attack in children: a Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the association between the concentration of particulate matter (PM2.5) and attack in children. Methods The computer and databases were used to search the key words Asthma and Child were searched by means of the subject headings ( Asthma and Child ) and free words ( Asthma* , Child* and Pediatric* etc.), moreover was searched on the basis of free words such as , Particulate Matter* , which were linked with in PubMed and Medline database. Furthermore, the key words asthma AND ( Child OR Pediatric OR Infant ) AND ( OR Particulate Matter OR Inhalable Particles ) for keywords were searched in CBM, CNKI, VIP and Wanfang databases.The literatures included those from the initial computer database up to those of December 2014 from computer database. Meanwhile manual research was added to screen literatures according to the standards of inclusion and exclusion. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was employed to assess the quality of the included literatures including selection, comparability and outcome. Data were synthesized and analyzed by Revman5.3 and Stata12.0 version for statistical analysis, heterogeneity test, sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and so on. Results A total of 17 literatures involving 1 326 573 children were included. The findings from quality assessment involved 2 studies for 8 scores, 2 for 7 scores, 7 for 6 scores, 5 for 5 scores, and 1 for 4 scores, respectively. The result of Meta-analysis showed that the combined the odds ratio (OR) of PM2.5 with childhood attack was 1.06, and 95% confidence interval(CI) was 1.03-1.08.Subgroup analysis showed that the OR on the hospital visit equaled to 1.03 (95% CI 1.01-1.06), and the OR on the symptom equaled to 1.11 (95% CI 1.06-1.16), moreover, subgroup analysis between developed and developing countries showed that the OR of the on developing countries corresponded to 1.04 (95% CI 1.02-1.06), and the OR of the on developed countries corresponded to 1.06 (95% CI 1.03-1.09). Conclusion There is a positive correlation between concentration of PM2.5 and attack in children. Key words: PM2.5; Child; Asthma; Meta-analysis
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 | 0.015 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.059 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".