What are the Antioxidant Status Predictors’ Factors among Male Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Patients?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Imbalance between antioxidant and oxidative stress is a major risk factor for pathogenesis of some chronic diseases such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study aimed to determine antioxidant and oxidative stress status, and also theirs association with respiratory function of male COPD patients to find the antioxidant predictors' factors. A total of 149 subjects were involved in a cross-sectional study. The study was conducted at two medical centers in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Results of the study showed that plasma vitamin C was low in most of the subjects (86.6%). Total antioxidant capacity was the lowest in COPD stage IV compare to other stages (p < 0.05). Level of plasma vitamin A (p= 0.012) and vitamin C (p= 0.007) were low in malnourished subjects. The predictors for total antioxidant capacity were forced vital capacity (FVC) % predicted and intake of ?-carotene (R2= 0.104, p= 0.002). Number of cigarette (pack/ year) and smoking index (number/ year) were not associated with total antioxidant capacity of this COPD population. Plasma oxidative stress as assessed plasma lipid peroxidation (LPO) was only positively correlated with plasma glutathione (p= 0.002). It might be a need to evaluate antioxidant status especially in older COPD patients to treat antioxidant deficiency which is leading to prevent COPD 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".