Māmawōhkamātowin (Working Together) to Enhance Wellness: Respiratory Health and the House
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: When environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is combined with other home-based exposures, such as mold, the risks to respiratory health are dramatically increased. Objective: To understand the relationships between the house, ETS and respiratory health outcomes of those living in the house. Design: The overall design was informed by the integration of community-based participatory research and transformative action research. This approach facilitated the process of co-creation, identifying issues of concern to the community, and utilizing the strengths and contributions of the community. Setting and Participants: One adult from each of the 238 homes in Sturgeon Lake First Nation, Saskatchewan, Canada. Intervention(s): Co-created community-based survey and house assessments. Results: The participation rate was 100% with 238 of 238 houses participating in both the survey and the house assessment. Almost half (47%) of the houses were smoke-free. Crowding was present in 67% of the houses with 19% having more than two persons/bedroom. House assessments revealed: 58% of homes had visible mold; 74% reported dampness in the house; 39% of houses reported a moldy/musty smell with 65% always having the smell present. Residents in the houses were treated for: wheeze (34.3%); bronchitis (27.9%); ear infection (23%); asthma (19.6%); tonsillitis (15.7%); pneumonia (13.2%); croup (9.4%); and respiratory viruses (8.0%). In the last five years hospitalizations for respiratory conditions were: pneumonia (14.8%); bronchitis (11.9%); asthma (9.4%); ear infection (8.0%); and tonsillitis (4.8%). Analysis reveals that when crowding was present in the house, the home was more frequently smoke-free. Moldy smell and visible mold in the house were significantly associated with respiratory health including tonsillitis, bronchitis, pneumonia, respiratory viruses, asthma, croup, ear infections, and wheeze. Having a moldy smell was strongly associated with both treatment and hospitalization for these conditions. Conclusions: Although smoke-free homes were important; mold in homes was more strongly associated with both treatment and hospitalization for respiratory conditions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.003 |
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".