Outpatient Oral Prednisone after Emergency Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we studied the effectiveness of prednisone in reducing the risk of relapse after outpatient exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: We enrolled 147 patients who were being discharged from the emergency department after an exacerbation of COPD and randomly assigned them to 10 days of treatment with 40 mg of oral prednisone once daily or identical-appearing placebo. All patients received oral antibiotics for 10 days, plus inhaled bronchodilators. The primary end point was relapse, defined as an unscheduled visit to a physician's office or a return to the emergency department because of worsening dyspnea, within 30 days after randomization. RESULTS: The overall rate of relapse at 30 days was lower in the prednisone group than in the placebo group (27 percent vs. 43 percent, P=0.05), and the time to relapse was prolonged in those taking prednisone (P=0.04). After 10 days of therapy, patients in the prednisone group had greater improvements in forced expiratory volume in one second than did patients in the placebo group (mean [+/-SD] increase from base line, 34+/-42 percent vs. 15+/-31 percent; P=0.007). Patients in the prednisone group also had significant improvements in dyspnea, as measured by the transitional dyspnea index (P=0.04) and by the dyspnea domain of the Chronic Respiratory Disease Index Questionnaire (P=0.02), but not in health-related quality of life (P=0.14). CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient treatment with oral prednisone offers a small advantage over placebo in treating patients who are discharged from the emergency department with an exacerbation of COPD.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".