Characteristics of Pulmonary Rehabilitation Programs Following an Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Early pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has beneficial impacts on people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) when delivered after an exacerbation; however, program characteristics are diverse. This systematic review aimed to determine the impact of PR program characteristics (mode, length, commencement, frequency, location, and supervision) on clinical outcomes following an exacerbation of COPD. METHODS: Studies were screened from Medline, Medline in progress, Embase, CINAHL, SCOPUS, CENTRAL, and PEDro. Included studies were randomized controlled trials of early PR after an exacerbation of COPD (commenced during hospital stay or ≤4 wk of hospital discharge). The primary outcomes were hospital readmissions and mortality. RESULTS: Thirty studies were included. Exercise training alone was delivered in 43% of studies. Program duration varied from length of inpatient stay to 12 wk. The interventions commenced as early as ≤24 hr of hospitalization for acute exacerbation, and up to 2 wk after discharge. Early PR was compared to usual care, and no studies made a direct comparison of the program characteristics of interest. Program characteristics associated with reduced risk of hospital admission were commencement after hospital discharge, duration longer than 3 wk, and programs that included exercise training and education (relative risk of readmission range 0.6-0.79); however, it was not possible to determine which of these characteristics made the most important contribution. Mortality risk did not vary according to PR program characteristics. CONCLUSION: Programs >3 wk, started after hospital discharge or including an educational component in addition to exercise, were most effective at reducing hospital readmissions.
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 | 0.006 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".