MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2884677787 · doi:10.1164/rccm.201801-0038oc

Capturing Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease with EXACT. A Subanalysis of FLAME

2018· article· en· W2884677787 on OpenAlexaff
Stefan Frent, Kenneth R. Chapman, Michael Larbig, Alexander Mackay, Robert Fogel, F Gutzwiller, Steven S. Shen, Francesco Patalano, Donald Banerji, Κonstantinos Κostikas, Jadwiga A. Wedzicha

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsIndacaterolMedicineSalmeterolExacerbationCOPDConfidence intervalFluticasoneHazard ratioRate ratioInternal medicinePopulationLung functionLungCorticosteroid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations accelerate lung function decline, reduce quality of life, and increase mortality. A subset of patients (n = 457) from the FLAME (Effect of Indacaterol Glycopyrronium vs. Fluticasone Salmeterol on COPD Exacerbations) study used the Exacerbations of COPD Tool (EXACT) to capture symptom-defined exacerbations. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus salmeterol/fluticasone on symptom-defined exacerbations measured using EXACT, and to assess differences between these events and exacerbations requiring healthcare resource use (HCRU). METHODS: All patients in FLAME used an electronic diary to record and detect symptom deteriorations; HCRU-related exacerbations were confirmed by investigators. In patients using the EXACT questionnaire, the onset, recovery, and magnitude of symptom-defined exacerbations were identified by changes in total scores relative to baseline. We analyzed the annualized rate and time to first symptom-defined (EXACT) exacerbation and assessed differences between symptom-defined and HCRU events in terms of number, severity, and concordance. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A nonsignificant 17% reduction in the annualized rate of symptom-defined (EXACT) exacerbations (rate ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-1.14; P = 0.242) and a numerically longer time to first symptom-defined exacerbation were observed with indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus salmeterol/fluticasone (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.56-1.03; P = 0.075). These results were consistent with data from the overall FLAME population. Of the symptom-defined (EXACT) events, 23.5% corresponded to HCRU events, and 22.2% of HRCU events were captured by EXACT (κ index, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.15-0.33). CONCLUSIONS: agonists/long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists as the preferred treatment option for patients at risk of future exacerbations. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01782326).

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.006
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine→Same topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research→French-language works237,207→