MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3082160342 · doi:10.1183/13993003.02122-2020

Should the number of acute exacerbations in the previous year be used to guide treatments in COPD?

2020· article· en· W3082160342 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohsen Sadatsafavi, James McCormack, John Petkau, Larry D. Lynd, Tae Yoon Lee, Don D. Sin

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsProvidence Health CareCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCOPDMedicineExacerbationInternal medicinePulmonary diseaseIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background In contemporary management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the frequent exacerbator phenotype, based on a 12-month history of acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD), is a major determinant of therapeutic recommendations. However, there is considerable debate as to the stability of this phenotype over time. Methods We used fundamental principles in time-to-event analysis to demonstrate that variation in the frequent exacerbator phenotype has two major sources: variability in the underlying AECOPD rate and randomness in the occurrence of individual AECOPDs. We re-analysed data from two large cohorts, the Evaluation of COPD Longitudinally to Identify Predictive Surrogate Endpoints (ECLIPSE) study and the SubPopulations and InteRmediate OutcoMes In COPD Study (SPIROMICS), using a Bayesian model that separated these sources of variability. We then evaluated the stability of the frequent exacerbator phenotype based on these results. Results In both cohorts, the pattern of AECOPDs strongly supported the presence of an individual-specific underlying AECOPD rate which is stable over time (Bayes Factor less than 0.001). Despite this, the observed AECOPD rate can vary markedly year-to-year within individual patients. For those with an underlying rate of 0.8–3.1 events·year−1, the frequent exacerbator classification, based on the observed rate, changes more than 30% of the time over two consecutive years due to chance alone. This value increases to more than 45% for those with an underlying rate of 1.2–2.2 events·year−1. Conclusions While the underlying AECOPD rate is a stable trait, the frequent exacerbator phenotype based on observed AECOPD patterns is unstable, so much so that its suitability for informing treatment decisions should be questioned. Whether evaluating AECOPD history over longer durations or using multivariate prediction models can result in more stable phenotyping needs to be evaluated.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.097
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.097
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations47
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory JournalSame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207