MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124562571 · doi:10.2522/ptj.20140542

Clinical Decision-Making Tool for Safe and Effective Prescription of Exercise in Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Results From an Interdisciplinary Delphi Survey and Focus Groups

2015· article· en· W2124562571 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Pat G. Camp, W. Darlene Reid, Frank Chung, Ashley Kirkham, Dina Brooks, Donna Goodridge, Darcy D. Marciniuk, Alison M. Hoens

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsThe Lung Association SaskatchewanSaskatchewan Health AuthorityUniversity of SaskatchewanBurnaby HospitalFraser HealthSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of TorontoProvidence Health Care
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineExacerbationMedical prescriptionCOPDPulmonary diseaseAcute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseasePhysical therapyDelphi methodFocus groupHealth careAcute careIntensive care medicineDiseaseNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Exercise is recommended for people with an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD), yet there is little information to guide safe and effective mobilization and exercise for these patients. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to develop a clinical decision-making tool to guide health care professionals in the assessment, prescription, monitoring, and progression of mobilization and therapeutic exercise for patients with AECOPD. DESIGN AND METHODS: A 3-round interdisciplinary Delphi panel identified and selected items based on a preselected consensus of 80%. These items were summarized in a paper-based tool titled Mobilization in Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (AECOPD-Mob). Focus groups and questionnaires were subsequently used to conduct a sensibility evaluation of the tool. RESULTS: Nine researchers, 13 clinicians, and 7 individuals with COPD identified and approved 110 parameters for safe and effective exercise in AECOPD. These parameters were grouped into 5 categories: (1) "What to Assess Prior to Mobilization," (2) "When to Consider Not Mobilizing or to Discontinue Mobilization," (3) "What to Monitor During Mobilization for Patient Safety," (4) "How to Progress Mobilization to Enhance Effectiveness," and (5) "What to Confirm Prior to Discharge." The tool was evaluated in 4 focus groups of 18 health care professionals, 90% of whom reported the tool was easy to use, was concise, and would guide a health care professional who is new to the acute care setting and working with patients with AECOPD. LIMITATIONS: The tool was developed based on published evidence and expert opinion, so the applicability of the items to patients in all settings cannot be guaranteed. The Delphi panel consisted of health care professionals from Canada, so items may not be generalizable to other jurisdictions. CONCLUSIONS: The AECOPD-Mob provides practical and concise information on safe and effective exercise for the AECOPD population for use by the new graduate or novice acute care practitioner.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score0.849

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.358 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical TherapySame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207