Associations of Helicobacter pylori and hepatitis A seropositivity with asthma in the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos (HCHS/SOL): addressing the hygiene hypothesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The hygiene hypothesis posits that microbial exposure reduces risk of asthma and other respiratory-related diseases. Helicobacter pylori and hepatitis A virus (HAV) are common fecal-oral infections. Our study aimed to examine associations of seropositivity to these agents with asthma in the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos (HCHS/SOL). METHODS: A total of 12,471 HCHS/SOL participants with baseline data on self-reported physician-diagnosed asthma, and antibodies anti-H. pylori and anti-HAV were included in this cross-sectional analysis. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the overall associations of seropositivity to each agent with asthma. Analyses were also stratified by Hispanic/Latino background. Effect modification by smoking status and nativity were tested. An analysis restricted to individuals with spirometry-defined chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was also considered. RESULTS: The weighted overall prevalence of asthma was 16.6%. The weighted seroprevalence of H. pylori was 56.6% and of HAV was 76.6%, and they significantly differed by Hispanic/Latino background. After accounting for age, sex, education and other key confounders, we found no associations between H. pylori or HAV seropositivity with asthma (with and without COPD), either for all individuals combined or for any of the six specific backgrounds. There were no significant interactions by smoking and nativity. CONCLUSION: Our findings did not provide support for the role of H. pylori or HAV, as evidence of the hygiene hypothesis in asthma among the large and diverse Hispanic/Latino populations of the HCHS/SOL. Trial registration NCT02060344.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".