Exploring the Relationship Between Physical Activity and Childhood Asthma: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Subgroup Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Childhood asthma is influenced by various factors, including lifestyle choices such as physical activity (PA). This study systematically reviewed and meta-analyzed the association between PA and childhood asthma, with subgroup analyses based on sex, socioeconomic status, parental education, and BMI. Methods This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the association between physical activity (PA) and childhood asthma across 22 studies, irrespective of geographic location. Searches were conducted in the Medline, CINAHL, Google Scholar, and Web of Science databases through manual searches. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) for cohort, case–control, and cross-sectional studies. Among the included studies, 17 were cross-sectional, 4 were cohort studies, and 1 was a case‒control study. Results The meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies revealed no significant association between physical activity and childhood asthma, with a pooled odds ratio (OR) of 1.07 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84–1.36) and considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 82%). However, a cohort study demonstrated a significant association, with a pooled relative risk (RR) of 1.14 (95% CI: 1.11–1.17). Subgroup analysis revealed a significant association between low socioeconomic status (SES) and parental education and greater odds of asthma among children. All included studies were rated as moderate to good quality based on the Newcastle‒Ottawa Scale. Conclusion Although no overall association was found, targeted interventions promoting PA in children at higher asthma risk, especially those with low socioeconomic status, parental education, or BMI, could help mitigate the burden of asthma in childhood.
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 | 0.015 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.021 | 0.040 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".