Characteristics, stability and outcomes of the 2011 GOLD COPD groups in the ECLIPSE cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2011 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) classifies patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) into four groups (A to D). We explored the characteristics, stability and relationship to outcomes of these groups within the ECLIPSE study (Evaluation of COPD Longitudinally to Identify Predictive Surrogate End-points) (n = 2101). Main results showed that: 1) these groups differed in several clinical, functional, imaging and biological characteristics in addition to those used for their own definition; 2) A and D groups were relatively stable over time, whereas groups B and C showed more temporal variability; 3) the risk of exacerbation over 3 years increased progressively from A to D, whereas that of hospitalisation and mortality were lowest in A, highest in D and intermediate and similar in B and C, despite the former having milder airflow limitation. The prevalence of comorbidities and persistent systemic inflammation were highest in group B. The different longitudinal behaviour of group A versus B and C versus D (each pair with similar forced expiratory volume in1 s (FEV1) values supports the 2011 GOLD proposal of assessing COPD patients by more than FEV1 only. However the assumption that symptoms do not equate to risk appears to be naïve, as groups B and C carry equally poor clinical outcomes, though for different reasons.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".