Gender differences in survival following hospitalisation for COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Gender differences in the clinical expression of COPD are increasingly recognised, but outcome differences have not been systematically examined. Gender differences in survival and rate of rehospitalisation were investigated in a large cohort of elderly patients with chronic airflow obstruction hospitalised for COPD. METHODS: The databases from the Québec provincial health insurance plan were used. The study population included subjects aged >66 years who received ≥3 prescriptions for respiratory medications in any 1-year period between 1 January 1990 and 31 December 2001. The study cohort consisted of patients with a first hospitalisation for COPD, after selection into the study population. Patients were followed until death or 31 December 2003. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate time to death and time to first hospitalisation for obstructive airways disease (COPD or asthma). The Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the effect of male gender on all-cause mortality and rehospitalisation. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 19,260 women and 23,893 men with a mean age of 77 years. 11,245 (58.4%) women and 16,754 (70.1%) men died after cohort entry. Male sex was associated with a significantly increased risk of death (adjusted HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.42 to 1.49) and with a significantly increased risk of rehospitalisation for obstructive airways disease (adjusted HR 1.12, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.15). CONCLUSION: Mean survival and time to rehospitalisation for obstructive airways disease are significantly better for female patients.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".