Previous tuberculosis disease as a risk factor for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a cross-sectional analysis of multicountry, population-based studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Risk factors for COPD in high-income settings are well understood; however, less attention has been paid to contributors of COPD in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) such as pulmonary tuberculosis. We sought to study the association between previous tuberculosis disease and COPD by using pooled population-based cross-sectional data in 13 geographically diverse, low-resource settings. Methods We pooled six cohorts in 13 different LMIC settings, 6 countries and 3 continents to study the relationship between self-reported previous tuberculosis disease and lung function outcomes including COPD (defined as a postbronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV 1 )/forced vital capacity (FVC) below the lower limit of normal). Multivariable regressions with random effects were used to examine the association between previous tuberculosis disease and lung function outcomes. Results We analysed data for 12 396 participants (median age 54.0 years, 51.5% male); 332 (2.7%) of the participants had previous tuberculosis disease. Overall prevalence of COPD was 8.8% (range 1.7%–15.5% across sites). COPD was four times more common among those with previous tuberculosis disease (25.7% vs 8.3% without previous tuberculosis disease, p<0.001). The adjusted odds of having COPD was 3.78 times higher (95% CI 2.87 to 4.98) for participants with previous tuberculosis disease than those without a history of tuberculosis disease. The attributable fraction of COPD due to previous tuberculosis disease in the study sample was 6.9% (95% CI 4.8% to 9.6%). Participants with previous tuberculosis disease also had lower prebronchodilator Z-scores for FEV 1 (−0.70, 95% CI −0.84 to −0.55), FVC (−0.44, 95% CI −0.59 to −0.29) and the FEV 1 :FVC ratio (−0.63, 95% CI −0.76 to −0.51) when compared with those without previous tuberculosis disease. Conclusions Previous tuberculosis disease is a significant and under-recognised risk factor for COPD and poor lung function in LMICs. Better tuberculosis control will also likely reduce the global burden of COPD.
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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".