MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4298138870 · doi:10.53730/ijhs.v6ns7.13051

Systematic review on prevalence and factors associated with breathlessness due to face masks in Asian countries

2022· article· en· W4298138870 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kavin Tay Wei Ze, Rayyan Roslin, Nurul Aina Ahmad Azdi, Rakeesh Veeramuthu, Sabariah Abd Hamid

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Health Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfection Control and Ventilation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFace masksInclusion and exclusion criteriaInclusion (mineral)MedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PopulationEnvironmental healthPsychologyDiseaseAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The usage of face masks has been of abundant and daily wear to every single population steeping high when the COVID-19 pandemic transmits airborne. The masks have been said to cause uneasiness and affect the performance of one’s daily living activities. Therefore, this study aims to identify the prevalence and factors associated with breathlessness due to face masks in Asian countries. Materials and Methods: Two main journal databases were adopted for this review and the study was done based on the PRISMA flow diagram. After being reviewed for stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria, the data was retrieved and compiled. Quality assessment was done using Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS). Results: ​​​Initial results search accounts for a total of about 800 articles to be reviewed. After eliminating duplication of articles with inclusion and exclusion criteria, we were left with nine articles. Our study shows that there is a high prevalence of breathlessness (26-100%) upon the usage of face masks with types of masks and duration of usage as its factors. Conclusion: Further studies are needed to infer the relationship between the type and duration of face mask usage with breathlessness.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Health SciencesSame topicInfection Control and VentilationFrench-language works237,207