Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and atrial fibrillation: an interdisciplinary perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is highly prevalent among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), shares common risk factors, and adds to the overall morbidity and mortality in this population. Additionally, it may promote AF and impair treatment efficacy. The prevalence of COPD in AF patients is high and is estimated to be ∼25%. Diagnosis and treatment of COPD in AF patients requires a close interdisciplinary collaboration between the electrophysiologist/cardiologist and pulmonologist. Differential diagnosis may be challenging, especially in elderly and smoking patients complaining of unspecific symptoms such as dyspnoea and fatigue. Routine evaluation of lung function and determination of natriuretic peptides and echocardiography may be reasonable to detect COPD and heart failure as contributing causes of dyspnoea. Acute exacerbation of COPD transiently increases AF risk due to hypoxia-mediated mechanisms, inflammation, increased use of beta-2 agonists, and autonomic changes. Observational data suggest that COPD promotes AF progression, increases AF recurrence after cardioversion, and reduces the efficacy of catheter-based antiarrhythmic therapy. However, it remains unclear whether treatment of COPD improves AF outcomes and which metric should be used to determine COPD severity and guide treatment in AF patients. Data from non-randomized studies suggest that COPD is associated with increased AF recurrence after electrical cardioversion and catheter ablation. Future prospective cohort studies in AF patients are needed to confirm the relationship between COPD and AF, the benefits of treatment of either COPD or AF in this population, and to clarify the need and cost-effectiveness of routine COPD screening.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".