Risk of asthma in children diagnosed with bronchiolitis during infancy: protocol of a longitudinal cohort study linking emergency department-based clinical data to provincial health administrative databases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The Canadian Bronchiolitis Epinephrine Steroid Trial (CanBEST) and the Bronchiolitis Severity Cohort (BSC) study enrolled infants with bronchiolitis during the first year of life. The CanBEST trial suggested that treatment of infants with a combined therapy of high-dose corticosteroids and nebulised epinephrine reduced the risk of admission to hospital. Our study aims to-(1) quantify the risk of developing asthma by age 5 and 10 years in children treated with high-dose corticosteroid and epinephrine for bronchiolitis during infancy, (2) identify risk factors associated with development of asthma in children with bronchiolitis during infancy, (3) develop asthma prediction models for children diagnosed with bronchiolitis during infancy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We propose a longitudinal cohort study in which we will link data from the CanBEST and BSC study with routinely collected data from provincial health administrative databases. Our outcome is asthma incidence measured using a validated health administrative data algorithm. Primary exposure will be treatment with a combined therapy of high-dose corticosteroids and nebulised epinephrine for bronchiolitis. Covariates will include type of viral pathogen, disease severity, medication use, maternal, prenatal, postnatal and demographic factors and variables related to health service utilisation for acute lower respiratory tract infection. The risk associated with development of asthma in children treated with high-dose corticosteroid and epinephrine for bronchiolitis will be assessed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models. Prediction models will be developed using multivariable logistic regression analysis and internally validated using a bootstrap approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Our study has been approved by the ethics board of all four participating sites of the CanBEST and BSC study. Finding of the study will be disseminated to the academic community and relevant stakeholders through conferences and peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN56745572; Post-results.
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 | 0.023 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".