MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2202851989 · doi:10.3138/ptc.2014-64

Effects of Autogenic Drainage on Sputum Recovery and Pulmonary Function in People with Cystic Fibrosis: A Systematic Review

2015· review· en· W2202851989 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Kimbly M. Morgan, Kristin Osterling, Robert Gilbert, Gail Dechman

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiotherapy Canada · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCystic fibrosisSputumChest physiotherapyPostural drainagePulmonary function testingLung functionAirwaySurgeryLungInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To determine the effects of short- and long-term use of autogenic drainage (AD) on pulmonary function and sputum recovery in people with cystic fibrosis (CF). METHODS: The authors conducted a systematic review of randomized and quasi-randomized clinical trials in which participants were people with CF who use AD as their sole airway clearance technique. RESULTS: Searches in 4 databases and secondary sources using 5 key terms yielded 735 articles, of which 58 contained the terms autogenic drainage and cystic fibrosis. Ultimately, 4 studies, 2 of which were long term, were included. All measured forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and found no change. The long-term studies were underpowered to detect change in FEV1; however, the short-term studies found a clinically significant sputum yield (≥4 g). CONCLUSION: AD has been shown to produce clinically significant sputum yields in a limited number of investigations. The effect of AD on the function of the pulmonary system remains uncertain, and questions have emerged regarding the appropriateness of FEV1 as a valid measure of airway clearance from peripheral lung regions. Further consideration should be given to the use of FEV1 as a primary measure of the effect of AD.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.284 · 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.

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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiotherapy CanadaSame topicCystic Fibrosis Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207