MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2281916877 · doi:10.1155/2005/974678

Use of Spirometry and Respiratory Drugs in Manitobans Over 35 Years of Age with Obstructive Lung Diseases

2005· article· en· W2281916877 on OpenAlexaffabout
NR Anthonisen, K Woodlrage, Jure Manfreda

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Respiratory Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaHealth Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSpirometryCOPDAsthmaMedical prescriptionPharmacyInternal medicinePhysical therapyIntensive care medicineFamily medicinePharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Previous data indicated that spirometry was underused in people with obstructive disease, especially those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). OBJECTIVE: To examine the use of respiratory drugs in patients with COPD and asthma, and to relate drug use to spirometry. METHODS: Manitoba Health maintains a database of physician services remunerated by fees that includes spirometry. The database contains the diagnosis and patient identifiers, as well as sex, date of birth and residential postal code. Similar identifiers are used in the provincial pharmacare program that records prescriptions dispensed at retail pharmacies. These databases were examined for the time period between 1996 to 2000, and people over 35 years of age diagnosed with asthma, COPD or both were identified. The frequency of spirometry in these patients and their use of respiratory drugs was determined. RESULTS: Spirometry and drug prescription frequencies increased with the number of physician visits (including those for bronchitis), but their patterns differed. Patients with asthma or asthma plus COPD had considerably higher rates of drug prescription and slightly higher spirometry rates than did those with COPD. Patients with asthma and asthma plus COPD who underwent spirometry were slightly more likely to receive drugs than those who did not undergo spirometry; this trend was more striking in patients with COPD. However, approximately 30% of patients with COPD who had five physician visits and who underwent spirometry did not receive drugs; this was true for approximately 10% of similar patients with asthma. Patients with asthma generally received beta-agonists and inhaled steroids; these agents were less commonly given to patients with COPD, who instead were given anticholinergics much more often than were asthmatics. Patients who were diagnosed with asthma plus COPD had beta-agonist and inhaled corticosteroid prescription rates similar to asthmatics, and anticholinergic prescription rates similar to patients with COPD. Theophylline and antileukotriene drugs were used less often than were inhaled agents. In patients with asthma, drugs were frequently discontinued, and during drug use, prescription refills were consistent with an intake of 30.9% of the prescribed doses. In patients with COPD, discontinuing drugs early was uncommon, and refills were consistent with the use of 54% of the prescribed amounts. The same was true of patients with both COPD and asthma. DISCUSSION: Drug prescription was considerably more common in patients labelled with asthma or COPD plus asthma than in patients with COPD. Spirometry was also less common in patients with COPD but had a distinct influence on the frequency of drug prescription. Patterns of drug prescription were predictable, and patterns of drug use indicated poor compliance, in agreement with other data. The results suggest that COPD symptoms may be discounted and patients systematically undertreated or the diagnosis could frequently be applied to people with trivial disease or both.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations21
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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