COPD patients’ self-reported adherence, psychosocial factors and mild cognitive impairment in pulmonary rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: In addition to clinical comorbidities, psychological and neuropsychological problems are frequent in COPD and may affect pulmonary rehabilitation delivery and outcome. The aims of the study were to describe a COPD population in a rehabilitative setting as regards the patients depressive symptoms, anxiety, mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and self-reported adherence and to analyze their relationships; to compare the COPD sample MCI scores with normative data; and to investigate which factors might predict adherence to prescribed physical exercise. This was a multicenter observational cross-sectional study. Of the 117 eligible stable COPD inpatients, 84 were enrolled according to Global initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) criteria (mainly in Stage III–IV). The assessment included Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), anxiety, depression and self-reported pharmacological and nonpharmacological adherence. From the MMSE, 3.6% of patients were found to be impaired, whereas from the MoCA 9.5% had a likely MCI. Patients referred had mild-severe depression (46.7%), anxiety (40.5%), good pharmacological adherence (80.3%) and difficulties in following prescribed diet (24.1%) and exercise (51.8%); they struggled with disease acceptance (30.9%) and disease limitations acceptance (28.6%). Most of them received good family (89%) or social (53%) support. Nonpharmacological adherence, depression, anxiety and MCI showed significant relations with 6-minute walking test, body mass index (BMI) and GOLD. Depression was related to autonomous long-term oxygen therapy modifications, disease perception, family support and MCI. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, higher BMI, higher depression and lower anxiety predicted lower adherence to exercise prescriptions ( P =0.0004, odds ratio =0.796, 95% CI =0.701, 0.903; P =0.009, odds ratio =0.356, 95% CI =0.165, 0.770; and P =0.05, odds ratio =2.361, 95% CI =0.995, 5.627 respectively). In COPD patients, focusing on pharmacological and nonpharmacological adherence enhance the possibility of tailored pulmonary rehabilitation programs. Keywords: depression, anxiety, mild cognitive impairment, adherence, COPD, pulmonary rehabilitation
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".