Association between asthma and invasive pneumococcal disease risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Asthma has been shown to be related to an increased risk of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD), although the results remain inconclusive. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to determine whether asthma increases the risk of IPD. This meta-analysis was performed to validate and strengthen the association between asthma and IPD. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the reference lists of all relevant articles and books were screened until May 2019. Two authors independently assessed eligibility and study quality and extracted data. A common odds ratio was estimated using a random-effects meta-analysis model of aggregated published data. RESULTS: A total of eight studies with 8877 IPD cases and 78,366 controls were included. Our meta-analysis showed that asthma was significantly associated with the increased risk of IPD (OR 2.44 [95% CI, 2.02-2.96]). The children with asthma (0-17 years old) (OR 2.86 [95% CI 1.80-4.55]) had a higher risk of IPD susceptibility compared with the adult patients (≥ 18 years old) (OR 2.45 [95% CI 1.98-3.03]). CONCLUSIONS: Results of this meta-analysis indicated that the patients with asthma had a higher risk of IPD susceptibility, especially among the children with asthma.
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 | 0.009 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.033 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".