Tea Consumption and Risk of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Middle-Aged and Older Singaporean Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The anti-oxidant and anti-inflammatory actions of phytochemicals and the smooth muscle relaxant actions of theophylline present in tea may confer pulmonary protection and reduce COPD risk. We investigated tea consumption (black, oolong, or green) association with COPD risks in a population-based cohort study of older adults aged ≥55. Methods: /FVC <0.70) among 4617 participants and 920 participants free of COPD at baseline who were assessed at follow-up 4.5 years later. Results: Prevalent cases of COPD consumed less tea than their non-COPD counterparts. Estimated odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of association with prevalent COPD, adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, housing type, smoking, alcohol, physical activity and BMI declined across tea consumption levels (p-trend=0.048), and was lowest for ≥3 cups/day (OR=0.77, 95% CI=0.61-0.96). The cumulated incidence of COPD declined across tea consumption categories (p-trend=0.012) and the lowest OR of association (OR=0.35, 95% CI=0.17-0.69) with consuming ≥3 cups/day after co-variate adjustment. Conclusion: Different kinds of tea showed similar non-significant trends of associations but appeared to be strongest for green tea. Tea consumption in this Asian population was associated with lowered COPD prevalence and incidence.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".