The Christmas Season as a Risk Factor for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Epidemics of hospitalization for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) occur annually during the Christmas holidays, and COPD exacerbations commonly coincide with respiratory viral infections. OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence and determinants of COPD exacerbations occurring between the Christmas holiday period and the remainder of the winter season. METHODS: Seventy-one subjects with COPD of mixed severity faxed daily symptom diaries to a computer monitoring system from December 1, 2006, to April 30, 2007. Possible exacerbations prompted a home visit for assessment, spirometry and specimen collection for virological testing. RESULTS: Study subjects submitted a total of 95.4% of possible daily symptom diary sheets by fax. Of 114 possible COPD exacerbations detected using the faxed diaries, 110 met the Anthonisen criteria for true exacerbations. A total of 47 exacerbations (mean 6.7/week) occurred during the Christmas holiday period, while 63 exacerbations (mean 4.3/week) occurred during the remainder of winter. Of the Christmas period exacerbations and of those in the balance of winter, 21 (44%) and 20 (32%), respectively, coincided with respiratory viral infections. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of COPD exacerbations during the Christmas period was greater than during the rest of winter in 2006/2007 and peaked immediately before Christmas - in contrast to hospital presentation for COPD, which peaked during the Christmas week. No clear role of respiratory viral infections in the increased rate of exacerbations during the Christmas period was established in the present study. COPD patients were highly compliant with daily symptom reporting using faxed daily diaries, which permitted nearly complete detection of all exacerbations that occurred at incidence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".