Risk of herpes zoster among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a population-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Systemic inflammation and dysregulated immune function in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is hypothesized to predispose patients to development of herpes zoster. However, the risk of herpes zoster among patients with COPD is undocumented. We therefore aimed to investigate the risk of herpes zoster among patients with COPD. Methods We conducted a cohort study using data from the Taiwan Longitudinal Health Insurance Database. We performed Cox regressions to compare the hazard ratio (HR) of herpes zoster in the COPD cohort and in an age- and sex-matched comparison cohort. We divided the patients with COPD into three groups according to use of steroid medications and performed a further analysis to examine the risk of herpes zoster. Results The study included 8486 patients with COPD and 33 944 matched control patients. After adjustment for potential confounding factors, patients with COPD were more likely to have incidents of herpes zoster (adjusted HR 1.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.45-1.95). When compared with the comparison cohort, the adjusted HR of herpes zoster was 1.67 (95% CI 1.43-1.96) for patients with COPD not taking steroid medications. The adjusted HR of herpes zoster was slightly greater for patients with COPD using inhaled corticosteroids only (adjusted HR 2.09, 95% CI 1.38-3.16) and was greatest for patients with COPD using oral steroids (adjusted HR 3.00, 95% CI 2.40-3.75). Interpretation Patients with COPD were at increased risk of herpes zoster relative to the general population. The relative risk of herpes zoster was greatest for patients with COPD using oral steroids.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".