Scoping Review of Asthma and COPD Research in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are two of the most prevalent chronic diseases in British Columbia (BC) and around the world. Gaps in knowledge are barriers to effective and quality chronic disease prevention and care. Consequences of knowledge gaps are seen in poor health outcomes among asthma and COPD patients and also excess healthcare costs. Many patient, health systems and socio-environmental factors are generally known to contribute to disparities in airways disease burden and impede timely, appropriate care. Yet, there is currently no published scoping review to provide an overview of knowledge related to asthma and COPD in BC. This scoping review aims to map the current knowledge of asthma and COPD in BC to socioecological frameworks. This will provide a structured description of the current body of knowledge on asthma and COPD in a way that readily supports subsequent conceptualisation of dynamic interrelationships between the various socioenvironmental factors that may operate at differing levels of proximity to individuals and populations. Consequently it will aid in identifying knowledge gaps in asthma and COPD in BC and also provide a foundation to support future studies.
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 | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.913 | 0.069 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".