FOOTPRINTS study protocol: rationale and methodology of a 3-year longitudinal observational study to phenotype patients with COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A better understanding is needed of the different phenotypes that exist for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), their relationship with the pathogenesis of COPD and how they may affect disease progression. Biomarkers, including those associated with emphysema, may assist in characterising patients and in predicting and monitoring the course of disease. The FOOTPRINTS study (study 352.2069) aims to identify biomarkers associated with emphysema, over a 3-year period. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The FOOTPRINTS study is a prospective, longitudinal, multinational (12 countries), multicentre (51 sites) biomarker study, which has enrolled a total of 463 ex-smokers, including subjects without airflow limitation (as defined by the 2015 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) strategy report), patients with COPD across the GOLD stages 1-3 and patients with COPD and alpha1-antitrypsin deficiency. The study has an observational period lasting 156 weeks that includes seven site visits and additional phone interviews. Biomarkers in blood and sputum, imaging data (CT and magnetic resonance), clinical parameters, medical events of special interest and safety are being assessed at regular visits. Disease progression based on biomarker values and COPD phenotypes are being assessed using multivariate statistical prediction models. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the authorities and ethics committees/institutional review boards of the respective institutions where applicable, which included study sites in Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Japan, Korea, Poland, Spain, Sweden, UK and USA; written informed consent has been obtained from all study participants. Ethics committee approval was obtained for all participating sites prior to enrolment of the study participants. The study results will be reported in peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02719184.
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 | 0.121 | 0.096 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.009 |
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".