Heart Failure is Highly Prevalent and Difficult to Diagnose in Severe Exacerbations of COPD Presenting to the Emergency Department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Some 20% of patients with stable Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) might have heart failure (HF). HF contribution to acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) presenting to the emergency department (ED) is not well established. AIMS: To assess (1) the HF incidence in patients presenting to the ED with AECOPD; (2) the concordance between ED and respiratory ward (RW) diagnosis; (3) the factors associated with risk of death after hospital discharge. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of 119 COPD patients presenting to ED for acute exacerbation of respiratory symptoms and then admitted to RW where a final diagnosis of AECOPD, AECOPD and HF and AECOPD and OD (other diagnosis), was obtained. ED and RW diagnosis were then compared. Factors affecting survival at follow-up were investigated. RESULTS: At RW, 40.3% of cases were diagnosed of AECOPD, 40.3% of AECOPD and HF and 19.4% of AECOPD and OD, with ED diagnosis coinciding with RW's in 67%, 23%, and 57% of cases respectively. At RW, 60% of patients in GOLD1 had HF, of which 43% were diagnosed at ED, while 40% in GOLD4 had HF that was never diagnosed at ED. Lack of inclusion in a COPD care program, HF, and early readmission for AECOPD were associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: HF is highly prevalent and difficult to diagnose in patients in all GOLD stages presenting to the ED with severe AECOPD, and along with lack of inclusion in a COPD care program, confers a high risk for mortality.
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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".