Gender does not impact the short- or long-term outcomes of home-based pulmonary rehabilitation in patients with COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pulmonary rehabilitation, whether performed at home or in a specialised centre, is effective in the management of COPD. As gender-related differences in COPD were previously reported, we aimed to evaluate the impact of gender on pulmonary rehabilitation outcomes in the short, medium and long term. In this retrospective observational study of 170 women and 310 men with COPD, we compared the outcomes of an 8-week home-based pulmonary rehabilitation programme including an individualised plan of retraining exercises, physical activities, therapeutic education, and psychosocial and self-management support. Exercise tolerance, anxiety, depression, and quality of life (QOL) were assessed using the 6-min stepper test (6MST), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Visual Simplified Respiratory Questionnaire (VSRQ), respectively. Assessments were carried out before, immediately after the pulmonary rehabilitation programme (T2) and at 8 (T8) and 14 months (T14). At baseline, women were younger (mean 62.1versus65.3 years), more often nonsmokers (24.7%versus7.7%) and had a higher body mass index (28versus26.4 kg·m−2). They more often lived alone (50.6%versus24.5%) and experienced social deprivation (66.7%versus56.4%). They had significantly lower exercise tolerance (−34 strokes, 6MST) and higher anxiety and depression (+3.2 HADS total score), but there were no between gender differences in QOL (VSRQ). Both groups showed similar improvements in all outcome measures at T2, T8 and T14 with a tendency for men to lose QOL profits over time. Despite some differences in baseline characteristics, women and men with COPD had similar short-, medium- and long-term benefits of a home-based pulmonary rehabilitation programme.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".