Systemic vascular health is compromised in both confirmed and unconfirmed asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Asthma is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular diseases. Despite many presenting with symptoms of asthma, asthma cannot always be confirmed by physiological assessment. It is thus far unknown if the heightened cardiovascular risk applies to this group. The purpose of this study was to examine markers of cardiovascular risk, including endothelial function, arterial stiffness, and systemic inflammation, in individuals with confirmed asthma, unconfirmed asthma, and healthy controls. As short-acting beta agonist (SABA) use is associated with increased cardiovascular risk, a secondary analysis was conducted to investigate the impact of regular SABA use on vascular outcomes. METHODS: reversibility, methacholine challenge, or exercise challenge. Endothelial function was assessed using flow-mediated dilation (FMD), arterial stiffness using pulse wave velocity (PWV), and systemic inflammation by C-reactive protein (CRP) levels. RESULTS: FMD was significantly lower in both asthma groups compared to controls (confirmed: 7.7 ± 3.6%, unconfirmed: 7.3 ± 3.5%, controls: 10.4 ± 3.6%, p = 0.02). No difference was found in PWV nor CRP. Asthma participants who used SABA had increased arterial stiffness compared to those without SABA (9.2 ± 2.7 m/s, 7.7 ± 1.1 m/s respectively, p = 0.03). No difference was seen in FMD or CRP between SABA groups. CONCLUSION: Individuals with a clinical history of asthma symptoms demonstrate vascular impairments regardless of physiological confirmation of disease. Regular SABA use increases arterial stiffness. Avoiding potentially inappropriate SABA use among people without physiologically confirmed asthma may thus be beneficial in curbing cardiovascular risk.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".