Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Cardiac Diseases. An Urgent Need for Integrated Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a global health issue with high social and economic costs. Concomitant chronic cardiac disorders are frequent in patients with COPD, likely owing to shared risk factors (e.g., aging, cigarette smoke, inactivity, persistent low-grade pulmonary and systemic inflammation) and add to the overall morbidity and mortality of patients with COPD. The prevalence and incidence of cardiac comorbidities are higher in patients with COPD than in matched control subjects, although estimates of prevalence vary widely. Furthermore, cardiac diseases contribute to disease severity in patients with COPD, being a common cause of hospitalization and a frequent cause of death. The differential diagnosis may be challenging, especially in older and smoking subjects complaining of unspecific symptoms, such as dyspnea and fatigue. The therapeutic management of patients with cardiac and pulmonary comorbidities may be similarly challenging: bronchodilators may have cardiac side effects, and, vice versa, some cardiac medications should be used with caution in patients with lung disease. The aim of this review is to summarize the evidence of the relationship between COPD and the three most frequent and important cardiac comorbidities in patients with COPD: ischemic heart disease, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation. We have chosen a practical approach, first summarizing relevant epidemiological and clinical data, then discussing the diagnostic and screening procedures, and finally evaluating the impact of lung-heart comorbidities on the therapeutic management of patients with COPD and heart diseases.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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".