FKBP5 Polymorphism, Coping and Emotional Status in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients Undergoing Pulmonary Rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: COPD is characterized by dyspnea, chronic cough, sputum production and extra pulmonary multimorbidity including depression, anxiety and cognitive problems. Methods: Cognitive and psychological clinical alterations/disorders; QoL/Health-related QoL; and Coping strategies were evaluated in 71 COPD patients characterized for FKBP5 gene (rs4713916). Instruments: MMSE, MoCA, ROCF, BDI-II, CES-D, SAS, SF-36, ADL, IADL, SGRQ, MRF 26, CIRS, Brief COPE. Results: Carriers of the rs4713916 polymorphisms (G:A) show better cognitive performances, higher degree of independence in the ADL and IADL, better QoL before and after rehabilitation, no presence of depressive mood and anxiety symptoms, no family history of psychiatric disorder, more ability to cope with stressors by avoiding emotions but demanding emotional support, and lesser use of anti-anxiety, anti-depressant anti-psychotic, hypnotic-sedative drugs. On the other hand, no difference was found as regards the number of comorbidities. Conclusions: Our study shows that rs4713916 is positively associated with better outcome for COPD. These results offer valuable insights into the role of FKBP5 in the complex network of mechanisms associated to clinical and behavioral features of COPD patients.. Our data may be used as initial benchmark for future clinical studies.
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) | 0.003 | 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".