MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115369772 · doi:10.1136/thx.2009.116699

Palliation of dyspnoea in advanced COPD: revisiting a role for opioids

2009· review· en· W2115369772 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThorax · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsNew Brunswick Community CollegeUniversity of SaskatchewanDalhousie UniversityDartmouth General Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineCOPDIntensive care medicinePalliative carePulmonary diseaseDiseaseNarrative reviewCause of deathInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) will be the third leading cause of death worldwide by 2020. The burdens of this increasingly prevalent illness borne by patients, their family caregivers and the healthcare system are substantial. Dyspnoea as the predominant symptom becomes increasingly difficult to palliate as COPD progresses through advanced stages and, for 50% of patients, can become refractory to conventional treatment. This narrative review focuses on the potential role for carefully initiated and titrated opioids in the management of dyspnoea for patients with advanced COPD who are not yet in a terminal stage, yet struggle with symptoms that reflect underlying mechanisms of dyspnoea that lend themselves to this approach. The many barriers that currently exist to the provision of opioids in this setting are addressed, and recommendations are provided for an approach that should engender confidence among patients, their caregivers and the physicians who treat them.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.356 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it