The asthma-COPD overlap syndrome:<i>A comparison of asthma outcomes in smoking vs non-smoking patients with incompletely reversible airway obstruction (IRAO)</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Asthma may be associated with IRAO, either due to an acquired smoking-related component of COPD or to asthma-related airway structural changes. This so called asthma-COPD overlap syndrome has been poorly studied. Aim: To evaluate the comparative clinical, physiologic and inflammatory features of smoking and non-smoking patients with an IRAO. Methods: This was an observational study comparing clinical characteristics, pulmonary function, and systemic or lower airway inflammation between the two groups of patients studied. Results: Sixty-five smoking IRAO (S-IRAO) and 37 non-smoking IRAO (NS-IRAO) were included. There were significantly more women in the S-IRAO group (P=0.02) than in the NS-IRAO group. S-IRAO patients had lower scores on the asthma control questionnaire (P=0.02) and asthma quality of life questionnaire (P=0.01) than NS-IRAO. In addition, S-IRAO showed a higher residual volume (P=0.009) and a lower diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide corrected for alveolar volume (P=0.0003) as compared to NS-IRAO. No differences were observed in systemic or lower airway inflammation. Conclusions: S-IRAO patients have a different phenotype as compared to patients with NS-IRAO, characterized poorer asthma control and quality of life, increased gas trapping and lower CO diffusion capacity.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".