Outpatients Specialist Care of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients in Poland—Results of the Kompas Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: COPD is one of the most important lung diseases. It is responsible for significant proportion of outpatients pulmonary clinics visits. Data on outpatients care of COPD patients in Poland are limited. This article presents design of the KOMPAS study and basic results relating to COPD patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The aim of this prospective study was to describe population of patients with COPD treated by specialists, and to characterize methods of care used in various COPD stages. Participating physicians used pocket PCs equipped with specially developed software to collect COPD patients' data. RESULTS: Data on 2958 COPD patients were analyzed. 2/3 of patients were males. Mean patients age was 63 years and mean FEV(1) - 57% of predicted value. 86% of all subjects underwent spirometry during the first visit or the previous 6 months. Cough and exertional dyspnoea were the most frequently reported COPD symptoms (about 80% of patients). At the first visit 32% of subjects were current smokers and 51% were ex-smokers. 17% of all study patients have never smoked. Before inclusion 2/3 of patients were treated with bronchodilatator, and about 1/3 with inhaled steroid. After entering the study, over 90% received bronchodilatator and more than 2/3 received inhaled steroid. Differences in treatment between stages of COPD based on its severity were relatively small. CONCLUSIONS: Results of the KOMPAS study provide basic information about COPD outpatients care in Poland. These data, especially concerning physicians' compliance with current COPD guidelines, may be useful in planning undergraduate/postgraduate training for physicians and for those who are responsible for health resource allocation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".