Safety of Sputum Induction in Moderate-to-Severe Smoking-Related Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Investigation of the safety of sputum induction in patients with moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been limited. OBJECTIVE: to evaluate this issue in 100 patients with a mean FEV1 of 1.2 (0.4) L. After 200 microg inhaled salbutamol, sputum induction was performed with inhaled saline in increasing and tailored concentrations (0.9% to 5%) until an adequate sample of sputum was obtained or the FEV1 fell by >20%. MAIN FINDINGS: Sputum induction was successful in 92% of occasions. The mean (SD) fall in FEV1 was 13.5 (8.6)%. Five patients had a fall >20% but all recovered to 10% of baseline after inhaled salbutamol. The magnitude of fall in FEV1 correlated weakly with salbutamol reversibility (r = 0.37, p < 0.001), baseline FEV1/VC (r = -0.32, p = 0.001) and baseline FEV1% predicted (r = -0.36, p = 0.003) but not with age, smoking history or post-Salbutamol FEV1. Principle CONCLUSION: Sputum induction can be performed safely using a patient-tailored approach in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD, supporting its use in research and clinical practice.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".