Regular Versus As-Needed Short-Acting Inhaled β -Agonist Therapy for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Regular short-acting inhaled beta-agonist therapy is of uncertain benefit in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We conducted a randomized, concealed, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial in two periods, each of 3-mo duration, involving 53 patients with a smoking history of > 20 pack-years, an FEV1 of < 70% predicted, and an FEV1/VC ratio of < 0.7 after inhalation of 200 microg albuterol. All patients received regular ipratropium bromide at 20 microg per puff in 2 puffs four times daily, beclomethasone at 250 microg per puff or equivalent corticosteroid in 2 puffs twice daily, and open-label inhaled albuterol as needed. Interventional therapy consisted of regular inhaled albuterol (100 microg per puff, in 2 puffs four times daily) versus placebo. Patients used twice as much active albuterol in the regular use period (mean: 8.07 puffs of coded and 4.68 puffs of open-label medication; total: 12.75 puffs daily) than during the as-needed period (mean: 6.34 puffs of open-label albuterol daily). Despite greater beta-agonist use, patients showed similar results during treatment and control periods for all outcomes. Differences between active and placebo periods were: FEV1: -0.04 L (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.09 to 0.01 L); slow vital capacity: 0.04 L (95% CI: -0.12 to 0.20 L); 6-min walk test distance: -3.1 m (95% CI: -16.8 to 10.5 m); and Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire scores for dyspnea: 0.02 (95% CI: -0.13 to 0.16); fatigue: -0.02 (95% CI: -0.25 to 0.20); mastery: 0.01 (95% CI: -0.20 to 0.24); and emotional function: 0.02 (95% CI: -0.20 to 0.24). We found that in patients with COPD, use of regular short-acting inhaled beta-agonists resulted in twice as much beta-agonist use without physiologic or clinical benefit as did use on an as-needed basis.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".