A cross-sectional survey on the effects of ambient temperature and humidity on health outcomes in individuals with chronic respiratory disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rationale Extremes of temperature and humidity are associated with adverse respiratory symptoms, reduced lung function, and increased exacerbations among individuals living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Objectives To describe the reported effects of temperature and humidity extremes on the health outcomes, health status and physical activity (PA) in individuals living with COPD. Methods A cross-sectional self-reported survey collected the effects on health status (COPD Assessment Test [CAT]), PA, and health outcomes in 1) moderate/ideal (14 to 21°C, 30 to 50% relative humidity [RH]), 2) hot and humid (≥ 25°C, > 50% RH) and 3) cold and dry (≤ 5°C, < 30% RH) weather conditions. Participants were ≥ 40 years old with COPD or related chronic respiratory diseases (e.g., asthma, sleep apnea, interstitial lung disease, lung cancer) and residing in Canada for ≥ 1 year. Negative responders to weather extremes were a priori defined as having a change of ≥ 2 points in the CAT. Main Results Thirty-six participants responded; the mean age (SD) was 65 (11) years, and 23 (64%) were females. Compared to ideal conditions, 23 (66%) and 24 (69%) were negatively affected by cold/dry and hot/humid weather, respectively. Health status was significantly lower, and PA amount and difficulty level were reduced in hot/humid and cold/dry conditions compared with ideal conditions. The number of exacerbations in hot/humid was significantly higher compared to ideal conditions. Conclusions More participants were negatively affected by extremes of weather: health status worsened, PA decreased, and frequency of exacerbations was higher compared to ideal. Future prospective studies should directly and objectively investigate different combinations of extreme temperature and humidity levels on symptoms and PA to understand their long-term health outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".