Bronchodilator responsiveness in children with primary ciliary dyskinesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Reversible airway obstruction is common in children with primary ciliary dyskinesia. However, the diagnostic value of adding bronchodilator (BD) response testing to routine spirometry is unclear. Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of pulmonary function test results obtained from children with primary ciliary dyskinesia seen as outpatients at the Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto. Spirometry results were collected for every appointment with BD response testing (“Visit”, with pre-BD and post-BD measurements) as well as for the previous (“Baseline”) and following (“Follow-up”) encounters. Results: A positive BD response was seen in 86 out of 474 (18.1%) of the pulmonary function tests from 82 children with primary ciliary dyskinesia. BD responsiveness was associated with a significant absolute change (±sd) in % predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV$_{1}$) from Baseline to Visit pre-BD (−6.5±10.3%, p<0.001), but not from Baseline to Follow-up (0.4±10.8, p=0.757). Antimicrobial therapy was initiated more commonly following a Visit with a positive BD response (OR 3.8, 95% CI 2.2–6.6) compared to no BD response. Children with a positive BD response had a greater annual decline in FEV$_{1}$% predicted compared to those with no BD response (−0.9% per yearversus−0.5% per year, p<0.001). The annual decline in FEV$_{1}$% predicted was greater in children with multiple compared to one measured positive BD responses (−1.3% per yearversus−0.6% per year, p<0.001) and in those not treated with antibiotic therapy following a positive BD response compared to those treated with antibiotics (−1.1%versus−0.6%, p<0.001). Conclusion: A positive BD response in children with primary ciliary dyskinesia may help identify those at risk for accelerated lung disease progression.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".