Asthma in the Americas: An Update: A Joint Perspective from the Brazilian Thoracic Society, Canadian Thoracic Society, Latin American Thoracic Society, and American Thoracic Society.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Asthma affects a large number of people living in the Americas, a vast and diverse geographic region comprising 35 nations in the Caribbean and North, Central, and South America. The marked variability in the prevalence, morbidity, and mortality from asthma across and within nations in the Americas offers a unique opportunity to improve our understanding of the risk factors and management of asthma phenotypes and endotypes in children and adults. Moreover, a better assessment of the causes and treatment of asthma in less economically developed regions in the Americas would help diagnose and treat individuals migrating from those areas to Canada and the United States. In this focused review, we first assess the epidemiology of asthma, review known and potential risk factors, and examine commonalities and differences in asthma management across the Americas. We then discuss future directions in research and health policies to improve the prevention, diagnosis, and management of pediatric and adult asthma in the Americas, including standardized and periodic assessment of asthma burden across the region; large-scale longitudinal studies including omics and comprehensive environmental data on racially and ethnically diverse populations; and dissemination and implementation of guidelines for asthma management across the spectrum of disease severity. New initiatives should recognize differences in socioeconomic development and health care systems across the region while paying particular attention to novel or more impactful risk factors for asthma in the Americas, including indoor pollutants such as biomass fuel, tobacco use, infectious agents and the microbiome, and psychosocial stressor and chronic stress.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| 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".