Fast Prediction of Deterioration and Death Risk in Patients With Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Using Vital Signs and Admission History: Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has 2 courses with different options for medical treatment: the acute exacerbation phase and the stable phase. Stable patients can use the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) to guide treatment strategies. However, GOLD could not classify and guide the treatment of acute exacerbation as acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) is a complex process. OBJECTIVE: This paper aimed to propose a fast severity assessment and risk prediction approach in order to strengthen monitoring and medical interventions in advance. METHODS: The proposed method uses a classification and regression tree (CART) and had been validated using the AECOPD inpatient's medical history and first measured vital signs at admission that can be collected within minutes. We identified 552 inpatients with AECOPD from February 2011 to June 2018 retrospectively and used the classifier to predict the outcome and prognosis of this hospitalization. RESULTS: The overall accuracy of the proposed CART classifier was 76.2% (83/109 participants) with 95% CI 0.67-0.84. The precision, recall, and F-measure for the mild AECOPD were 76% (50/65 participants), 82% (50/61 participants), and 0.79, respectively, and those with severe AECOPD were 75% (33/44 participants), 68% (33/48 participants), and 0.72, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This fast prediction CART classifier for early exacerbation detection could trigger the initiation of timely treatment, thereby potentially reducing exacerbation severity and recovery time and improving the patients' health.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".