Functional Tests in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Part 1: Clinical Relevance and Links to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and an important cause of disability. A thorough patient-centered outcome assessment, including not only measures of lung function, exercise capacity, and health-related quality of life, but also functional capacity and performance in activities of daily life, is imperative for a comprehensive management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. This American Thoracic Society Seminar Series is devoted to help clinicians substantiate their choice of functional outcome measures in this population. In Part 1 of this two-part seminar series, we describe the various domains of functional status to elucidate terms and key concepts intertwined with functioning and to demonstrate the clinical relevance of assessing functional capacity in the context of activities of daily living in agreement with the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. We hope that a better understanding of the various defining components of functional status will be instrumental to healthcare providers to optimize chronic obstructive pulmonary disease evaluation and management, ultimately leading to improved quality of life of patients afflicted by this condition. This first article also serves as an introduction to Part 2 of this seminar series, in which the main functional tests available to assess upper and lower body functional capacity of these patients are discussed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".