Association between higher morning preference and better health-related quality of life in asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Circadian preference for eveningness has been linked to a higher risk of asthma and allergies, but its association with health-related quality of life (HRQL) in asthma has not been studied yet. Objective: We aimed to investigate the associations between individual circadian preference and HRQL in asthma. Methods: Among 691 adult asthma patients from Canada, India, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, a digital questionnaire was administered to capture demographic information, social and psychologic attributes, comorbidities, and medication adherence. Circadian preference and HRQL were assessed by the reduced version of the morningness-eveningness questionnaire (rMEQ) and the short form of the chronic respiratory questionnaire, respectively. We analyzed the association between chronotype and HRQL using mixed-effect linear regression models. Results: Of all participants, 59% were female with a mean (standard deviation) age of 49 (17) years. Median (interquartile range) rMEQ total score was 17 (14-19). Mean (standard deviation) dyspnea, fatigue, emotional function, and mastery scores were 5.94 (1.2), 4.38 (1.3), 5.05 (1.3), and 1.96 (1.1), respectively. In regression analysis, a higher rMEQ total score (higher morningness) was associated with less fatigue (β = 0.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.04 to 0.09) and better emotional function (β = 0.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.004 to 0.06), and these associations were mediated by less anxiety, depression, and alcohol abuse, and better sleep quality. Conclusion: Morning orientation is associated with better HRQL in patients with asthma. The results suggest that working with patients to promote schedules and habits related to morningness may be beneficial.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".