Aging and extrapulmonary effects of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: People with COPD have a decline in functional status, but little is known about the rate of decline and factors that contribute. Of particular concern is the decline in cognitive and functional performance. Decrease in cognitive and functional performance will finally lead to decreased health status, sedentary life style and premature frailty. Aim: The aim of this study is to compare functional performance and cognitive status in patients with COPD of different ages and to examine the changes in extrapulmonary effects. Patients and methods: This study included 62 patients with COPD risk class D who were divided into two groups (<70 years, N=30 and >70 years, N=32). Patients first completed the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), which is a 30-point test that assesses different cognitive domains, while isometric knee extension (IKE) was measured using a digital handheld dynamometer, and functional exercise level was assessed using the 6-minute walking distance (6MWD) test. Results: The patients’ older age (age higher than 70 years) was associated with a significantly lower body mass index (BMI, 27.50 vs 24.24 kg/m 2 ; P =0.020), higher vital capacity parameters, forced vital capacity (FVC, 2.74 vs 2.82 L; P =0.799), FVC (%) (73.00 vs 66.50, P =132), forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV 1 , 0.93 vs 1.13 L; P =0.001) and FEV 1 (%) (28.50 vs 30.50, P =0.605). In addition, patients at older age presented a significantly reduced physical activity capacity, 6MWD (385.93 vs 320.84 m, P <0.001) and IKE (24.75 vs 22.55 kgf, P =0.005), as well as higher values for inflammatory biomarkers, C-reactive protein (8.77 vs 3.34 mg/L, P =0.022). Moreover, patients at older age presented significantly lower score at the cognitive assessment, MoCA (23.50 vs 20.00, P <0.001). Conclusion: Elderly COPD patients have reduced exercise capacity and muscle strength, deteriorated cognitive function and increased inflammatory markers. Furthermore, inflammation markers were significantly correlated with muscle strength, walking distance and cognitive impairment. Keywords: aging, inflammation, strength, pulmonary function
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".