Occupational Competence and Activities of Daily Living Performance in Bronchial Asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Activity restriction is one of the most common symptoms reported by people living with bronchial asthma. Purpose. The study aimed to determine occupational competence and values in people living with bronchial asthma and compare with the occupational competence and activities of daily living (ADL) of healthy controls. Methods. Twenty individuals with asthma and 20 healthy controls were enrolled. Occupational competence and values were assessed using the Occupational Self-Assessment (OSA) questionnaire. Restriction of ADL was determined using the London Chest ADL Scale. Findings. Occupational competence was lower, and all London Chest ADL scores were significantly higher in asthma individuals compared to controls ( p < .05). The most affected parameters reported by asthma individuals on the OSA were the ability to concentrate, perform physical tasks, work toward goals, and use abilities effectively. Implications. Evaluating occupational competence in people living with bronchial asthma is important to identify their occupational problem areas and provide appropriate interventions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".