MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313331721 · doi:10.1183/23120541.00489-2022

An inverse relationship between asthma prevalence and medication dispensation trend: a 12-year spatial analysis of electronic health record data in Alberta, Canada

2022· article· en· W4313331721 on OpenAlexaffabout
Subhabrata Moitra, Andrew Fong, Mohit Bhutani

Bibliographic record

VenueERJ Open Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsthmaConflict of interestFamily medicineDownloadQuality of life (healthcare)Health careEnvironmental healthNursingEconomic growthLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease of the airways that affects over 300 million people worldwide [1]. As of 2019, 2.95 million Canadians were diagnosed with asthma [2]. While there are standard recommendations and guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of asthma, patients living with this disease often experience poor health-related quality of life [3] and continue to experience exacerbations [4]. Apart from the increasing air pollution, rapid urbanization, and a growing trend in marijuana and vaping, particularly among the adolescents [5–8], poor patient adherence to asthma medications is a major contributing factor to these outcomes [9–12]. Despite efforts to change this narrative through patient and physician education [13–15], it is well reported that adherence to treatment in asthma is varied, with rates of <50% in children [16] and 30–70% in adults [1, 17]. Footnotes This manuscript has recently been accepted for publication in the ERJ Open Research . It is published here in its accepted form prior to copyediting and typesetting by our production team. After these production processes are complete and the authors have approved the resulting proofs, the article will move to the latest issue of the ERJOR online. Please open or download the PDF to view this article. Conflict of interest: SM reports personal fees from Synergy Respiratory & Cardiac Care (Canada), Permanyer Inc. (Spain), Elsevier Inc. (USA), Apollo Gleneagles Hospital (India), and Institute of Allergy-Kolkata (India), outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: AF does not have any conflict of interest to declare. Conflict of interest: MB received grants from Canadian Institute of Health research, Sanofi Genzyme, Astra Zeneca, and GSK; and received payments from Astra Zeneca, GSK, Sanofi Genzyme, Valeo, Covis Pharmaceuticals, and Canadian Thoracic Society, outside the submitted work.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.724

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueERJ Open ResearchSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207