MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586097311 · doi:10.1007/s41030-017-0027-5

A Real-World Study of 30-Day Exacerbation Outcomes in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Patients Managed with Aerobika OPEP

2017· article· en· W2586097311 on OpenAlexaff
Chakkarin Burudpakdee, Arpamas Seetasith, Patrick J Dunne, Garry W Kauffman, Brian Carlin, Dom Coppolo, Jason Suggett

Bibliographic record

VenuePulmonary Therapy · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsTrudell Medical International (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCOPDExacerbationChronic bronchitisCopd exacerbationPulmonary diseaseBronchitisInternal medicineIntensive care medicineAcute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oscillating positive expiratory pressure (OPEP) devices may reduce chronic symptoms in patients with obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, no real-world studies have been performed to evaluate the benefits of these devices. The objective of this study was to measure the rate of early (30-day) moderate-to-severe exacerbations and related costs in COPD patients treated with Aerobika, an OPEP device, vs. a matched control group in a real-world setting. The study utilized data from the QuintilesIMS’ CDM hospital database. COPD patients treated with Aerobika OPEP between 9/2013 and 8/2015 were propensity score matched to COPD patients who did not use any positive expiratory pressure device. Severe exacerbation was defined as a hospital admission with a diagnosis for chronic bronchitis or COPD. Moderate-to-severe exacerbation was defined as a hospitalization or an ED visit with a diagnosis for chronic bronchitis or COPD. Exacerbations and costs were compared between cohorts at 30 days. A generalized linear model (GLM) was used to estimate the marginal effect of Aerobika OPEP on the cost of ED visits and hospitalizations due to COPD exacerbations. A total of 405 Aerobika OPEP patients were matched to 405 controls. At 30 days, 18.5% of subjects using the Aerobika OPEP vs. 25.7% of controls had a moderate-to-severe exacerbation ( p = 0.014); 13.8% of subjects with Aerobika OPEP vs. 19.0% of controls had a severe exacerbation ( p = 0.046). The mean per patient cost of moderate-to-severe exacerbations and severe exacerbations in the Aerobika OPEP group was significantly lower than controls ($2975 vs. $6065; p = 0.008, and $2838 vs. $5871; p = 0.009, respectively). In the GLM, the per-patient cost of moderate-to-severe exacerbations in the Aerobika OPEP group was 34% lower ( p = 0.012) than the control group. Study findings suggest that using Aerobika OPEP as part of a treatment regimen may help reduce ED visits, hospital re-admissions and related costs in COPD patients who have a history of exacerbations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePulmonary TherapySame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207