MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2743415469 · doi:10.1177/1715163517714488

The role of spirometry in the management of obstructive airways disease: How pharmacists should get involved

2017· article· en· W2743415469 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alan Kaplan, Suzanne Levitz, Kristine Petrasko

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpirometryMedicinePulmonary diseaseIntensive care medicineDiseaseCardiologyInternal medicineAsthma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patient caseYour patient, PR (a 50-year-old man who is an ex-smoker), comes in to renew his short-acting β2-agonist (SABA).His physician has told him he has asthma.He has been getting his SABA from your pharmacy for only the past year or so and has a combined inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting β-agonist (ICS/ LABA) on file.You know that you are supposed to do several things here: assess his asthma control (daytime and nighttime symptoms, exacerbations, etc.), ensure that his inhaler is being used correctly, review other medications he is taking and consider possible triggers.You consider the SABA use in context of his other medications and wonder why he has come in for an inhaler only 1 month after the last one.Does that not mean his asthma may be out of control?Why isn't he filling his ICS/LABA prescription?All these questions are important, but your first step should be to confirm his diagnosis, as choice of appropriate therapy is dependent on an accurate diagnosis.So, your first question is: "Does the patient have asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or another lung problem altogether?"If the patient has never had an objective measure of pulmonary function, perhaps this should be the first step?

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.095
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.195

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.095
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.006
Scholarly communication0.0120.019
Open science0.0040.008
Research integrity0.0200.026
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.007

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada→Same topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research→French-language works237,207→