Automated O<sub>2</sub> titration improves exercise capacity in patients with hypercapnic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomised controlled cross-over trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Automatically titrated O 2 flows (FreeO 2 ) was compared with constant O 2 flow on exercise capacity, O 2 saturation and risk of hyperoxia-related hypercapnia in patients with severe COPD with baseline hypercapnia and long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT). Twelve patients were enrolled in a randomised double-blind cross-over study to perform exercise with either FreeO 2 or constant flow. Endurance time (primary outcome) and SpO 2 were both significantly improved with FreeO 2 compared with constant flow (p<0.04), although pCO 2 was similar in both conditions. Automated titration of O 2 significantly and clinically improved endurance walking time in patients with severe COPD receiving LTOT, without worsening of pCO 2 . Trial registration number Results , NCT01575327
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".