MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120228847 · doi:10.1183/09031936.06.00024605

The natural history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

2006· article· en· W2120228847 on OpenAlexaff
David M. Mannino, G. Watt, David Hole, C. Gillis, CL Hart, Alex McConnachie, George Davey Smith, Mark Upton, V M Hawthorne, Don D. Sin, S. F. Paul Man, DW Mapel, Jørgen Vestbo

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCOPDMedicineNatural historyPulmonary diseaseIntensive care medicineLung functionDiseasePsychological interventionObstructive lung diseaseLung diseaseLungPathologyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the USA, and it remains one of the few diseases that continues to increase its numbers. The development and progression of COPD can vary dramatically between individuals. A low level of lung function remains the cornerstone of COPD diagnosis and is a key predictor of prognosis. Lung function, however, is not the only factor in determining morbidity and mortality related to COPD, with factors such as body mass index, exercise capability and comorbid disease being important predictors of poor outcomes. Exacerbations of COPD are additional important indicators of both quality of life and outcomes in COPD patients. Definitions of exacerbations can vary, ranging from an increase in symptoms to COPD-related hospitalisations and death. COPD exacerbations are more common in patients with lower levels of lung function and may lead to more rapid declines in lung function. Better understanding of the natural history of COPD may lead to better definitions of specific COPD phenotypes, better interventions and improved outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations262
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory JournalSame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207