Comparison of allergens and symptoms in patients with allergic rhinitis between 1990s and 2010s
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The prevalence of allergic rhinitis (AR), an environment- and lifestyle-dependent condition, has been constantly increasing in Korea. Although the environment and lifestyle of the Korean people have recently undergone rapid changes, corresponding changes in the characteristics of AR patients have not been well documented. Therefore, we aimed to outline the changes in allergens and clinical manifestations of AR in Korean patients from the 1990s and 2010s. Methods We reviewed 1447 and 3388 AR patients who visited the same tertiary hospital in the 1990s and 2010s, respectively. All patients were diagnosed with AR based on the presence of characteristic symptoms, positive skin prick test results, and answered a symptom questionnaire at the time of visit. We compared differences in the allergens and results of the symptom questionnaire between the two sets of patients. Results When compared with the 1990s, the rate of sensitization to house dust mites, cockroaches, Aspergillus, Alternaria, and tree pollen significantly increased and that to cat fur significantly decreased in patients from the 2010s (all P < 0.05). Male predominance was observed with two peaks in the age distribution of patients from the 2010s. The proportion of patients with moderate-to-severe nasal obstruction and itching of the nose/eye increased (each P < 0.05) and that of patients with minor symptoms such as olfactory disturbances, cough, sore throat, and fatigue also increased (all P < 0.01) in the 2010s. Conclusions Allergen reactivity and type and symptom severity in Korean AR patients significantly varied between the 1990s and 2010s. Our results may therefore be helpful for patient counseling and 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".