Changes in FEV1 over 8 years in COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We previously examined change in FEV1 in the ECLIPSE study (Vestbo J 2011), and observed that over the 3-year study period, 69% of the patients had a decline in FEV1 >21 ml/year (Group A), 23% had a stable FEV1 (ranging from a decrease of 20 to an increase of 20ml/ year) (group B); and 8% had an increase of >21 ml/year (Group C). In an extended study of another 5 years of the participants in 9 centers of the ECLIPSE study we aimed to study the subsequent change in FEV1 in these three groups. METHODS: Subjects alive at the end of 3-year ECLIPSE study (visit 8) and belonging to one of the 9 centers (N=807) were invited to 3 visits during the following 5 years. At each visit post-bronchodilator spirometry, and smoking status were recorded. The current analyses comprise only those attending at least one ECLIPSE extension visit. Analysis included a linear mixed model with random intercept and random coefficients for time (separate slopes for time: visit 1-visit 8 and time: visit 8-visit 11. The study was sponsored by GlaxoSmithKline. RESULTS: Of those invited 480, 406 and 278 had 1, 2 and 3 spirometries recorded during the 5 years extension period. During the ECLIPSE extension the estimated annual mean (SE) change in FEV1 in groups A, B and C were -44(3.6) ml, -53 (6.1) ml and -73(10.2) ml, respectively. The decline in group C was significantly higher than in groups A and B, also after adjusting for gender, age, and pack years. CONCLUSIONS: Those experiencing an improvement in FEV1 during the ECLIPSE study had the subsequent steepest decline in FEV1 during the ECLIPSE extension. Those with stable and decline in FEV1 during the ECLIPSE had a subsequent similar decline in FEV1 during the ECLIPSE extension.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".