Herat failure and chronic obstructive airway disease as combined comorbidities. Meta-analysis and Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The existence of COPD and heart failure in elderly population adds additional morbidity and mortality risk than if those with only one of the two comorbidities.The aim of the current metaanalysis was to explore the effect of COPD on heart failure patient in terms of all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality and recurrent heart failure hospitalization. Methods and results:A comprehensive search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane was conducted until August 2017.The total standardized mean difference, with 95% (CI), was estimated for fi xed and random effects models to present "pooled effect" for continuous outcomes (mean ± standard deviation or median ± interquartile range) & categorical outcomes (Odds risk OR).Statistical heterogeneity among studies was assessed with Cochran's Q test and the I 2 statistic.A total of 15 observational studies were analyzed.COPD and heart failure patients have higher: short term (in hospital, 1-3 months) (P=0.009,0.0006 respectively), long term all-cause mortality (1& 2-5 years) (P=0.00001,0.04 respectively), long term cardiac mortality (P=0.02) and more frequent hospitalization for heart failure (P=0.002).GOLD stage II-IV COPD had higher long-term all-cause mortality (P<0.0001)but not long-term cardiac mortality (P=NS).Beta blockers treatments appear to decrease all-cause mortality in COPD with heart failure (P <0.0001).Conclusion: Heart failure patients with COPD have frequent heart failure hospitalization, higher longterm cardiac mortality, short-and long-term all-cause mortality that is more evident in advanced stage of COPD.Beta blockers use appear to be safe and decrease mortality in these patients.
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 | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.029 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".