The link between low resting diffusion capacity and exercise intolerance in COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The mechanisms linking reduced diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO) to dyspnoea and exercise intolerance in COPD remain poorly understood. Methods: We tested the association between peak oxygen-uptake (⩒O2) and resting physiological measures including DLCO in 300 COPD patients. We stratified the sample into tertiles of FEV1 and compared exercise responses in groups with normal and low DLCO ( Results: DLCO was associated with peak ⩒O2, peak work-rate and dyspnoea/⩒O2 slope (all p<0.01) after adjusting for other independent variables including FEV1 and lung hyperinflation. Within tertiles, peak ⩒O2 and work-rate were lower (p<0.05) in low versus normal DLCO groups. During exercise in all tertiles, the low DLCO group had higher dyspnoea ratings, ventilation, ventilatory equivalent for carbon-dioxide and greater oxygen de-saturation and earlier respiratory mechanical limitation than normal DLCO, all p<0.05 (figure). Conclusion: After accounting for lung mechanics, resting DLCO
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".