MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tiotropium in Combination with Placebo, Salmeterol, or Fluticasone–Salmeterol for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Possible Confounding Effect of Treatment Withdrawal?

2007· article· en· W2021429280 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shawn D. Aaron

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Internal Medicine · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalmeterolMedicineFluticasonePlaceboTiotropium bromideCOPDPulmonary diseaseInternal medicineCorticosteroidAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Letters18 December 2007Tiotropium in Combination with Placebo, Salmeterol, or Fluticasone–Salmeterol for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Possible Confounding Effect of Treatment Withdrawal?Shawn D. Aaron, MDShawn D. Aaron, MDFrom the Ottawa Health Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario K1H 8L6, Canada.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-147-12-200712180-00012 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail IN RESPONSE:We thank Dr. Brown for his comments. He is correct that many patients randomly assigned into our clinical trial were already taking inhaled corticosteroids and/or LABAs at enrollment and that withdrawal effects may have played a role in influencing clinical outcomes. However, the objective of our trial was to determine whether combination treatment with tiotropium plus salmeterol or tiotropium plus fluticasone–salmeterol improved clinical outcomes in adults with moderate and severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. We did not intend to limit the trial only to patients who were inhaled corticosteroid–naive and LABA-naive, because this would have potentially limited the ... Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: From the Ottawa Health Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario K1H 8L6, Canada.Disclosures: None disclosed. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoTiotropium in Combination with Placebo, Salmeterol, or Fluticasone–Salmeterol for Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Shawn D. Aaron , Katherine L. Vandemheen , Dean Fergusson , François Maltais , Jean Bourbeau , Roger Goldstein , Meyer Balter , Denis O'Donnell , Andrew McIvor , Sat Sharma , Graham Bishop , John Anthony , Robert Cowie , Stephen Field , Andrew Hirsch , Paul Hernandez , Robert Rivington , Jeremy Road , Victor Hoffstein , Richard Hodder , Darcy Marciniuk , David McCormack , George Fox , Gerard Cox , Henry B. Prins , Gordon Ford , Dominique Bleskie , Steve Doucette , Irvin Mayers , Kenneth Chapman , Noe Zamel , Mark FitzGerald , and Tiotropium in Combination with Placebo, Salmeterol, or Fluticasone–Salmeterol for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Possible Confounding Effect of Treatment Withdrawal? Samuel M. Brown Does Tiotropium Reduce Hospitalizations in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease? Yuji Oba Metrics Cited ByA role of budesonide/formoterol fixed combination in the treatment of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A conclusion of the Expert Council of the Volga Federal district of RussiaCombined corticosteroid and long-acting beta 2 -agonist in one inhaler versus placebo for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2. LABA, Combined LABA and ICSCurrent World LiteratureDrug therapy of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 18 December 2007Volume 147, Issue 12Page: 882-883KeywordsBronchodilatorsChronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseClinical trialsConflicts of interest ePublished: 18 December 2007 Issue Published: 18 December 2007 CopyrightCopyright © 2007 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF DownloadLoading ...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.174
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.174
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Internal MedicineSame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207