MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166219158 · doi:10.1183/09031936.00002711

Risk factors for COPD spirometrically defined from the lower limit of normal in the BOLD project

2011· review· en· W2166219158 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Hooper, Peter Burney, William M. Vollmer, Mary Ann McBurnie, Þórarinn Gíslason, Wan C. Tan, Anamika Jithoo, Ali Kocabaş, Tobias Welte, A. Sonia Buist

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersWellcome Trust
KeywordsCOPDMedicineSpirometryBody mass indexInternal medicineRisk factorFamily historyPulmonary diseaseAsthmaPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is predicted to become the third most common cause of death and disability worldwide by 2020. The prevalence of COPD defined by the lower limit of normal was estimated using high-quality spirometry in surveys of 14 populations aged ≥ 40 yrs. The strength and consistency of associations were assessed using random effects meta-analysis. Pack-years of smoking were associated with risk of COPD at each site. After adjusting for this effect, we still observed significant associations of COPD risk with age (OR 1.52 for a 10 yr age difference, 95% CI 1.35-1.71), body mass index in obese compared with normal weight (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.37-0.67), level of education completed (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67-0.87), hospitalisation with a respiratory problem before age 10 yrs (OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.42-3.91), passive cigarette smoke exposure (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.05-1.47), tuberculosis (OR 1.78, 95%CI 1.17-2.72) and a family history of COPD (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.19-1.90). Although smoking is the most important risk factor for COPD, other risk factors are also important. More research is required to elucidate relevant risk factors in low- and middle-income countries where the greatest impact of COPD will occur.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations110
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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