An international randomized study of a home-based self-management program for severe COPD: the COMET
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Most hospitalizations and costs related to COPD are due to exacerbations and insufficient disease management. The COPD patient Management European Trial (COMET) is investigating a home-based multicomponent COPD self-management program designed to reduce exacerbations and hospital admissions. DESIGN: Multicenter parallel randomized controlled, open-label superiority trial. SETTING: Thirty-three hospitals in four European countries. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 345 patients with Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease III/IV COPD. INTERVENTION: The program includes extensive patient coaching by health care professionals to improve self-management (eg, develop skills to better manage their disease), an e-health platform for reporting frequent health status updates, rapid intervention when necessary, and oxygen therapy monitoring. Comparator is the usual management as per the center's routine practice. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Yearly number of hospital days for acute care, exacerbation number, quality of life, deaths, and costs.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".