MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206957852 · doi:10.1136/bmjresp-2021-001160

Physical and affective components of dyspnoea are improved by pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD

2022· article· en· W4206957852 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open Respiratory Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
FundersGrifolsCSL BehringRegeneron PharmaceuticalsTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesSanofiGlaxoSmithKlinePfizerAgence Régionale de Santé Hauts-de-FranceLes Laboratories Pierre FabreAstraZenecaEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsMedicineCOPDPhysical therapyPulmonary rehabilitationAnxietyMinimal clinically important differenceRehabilitationQuality of life (healthcare)Body mass indexInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Dyspnoea is a multidimensional experience of breathing discomfort, but its affective dimension is unfrequently assessed in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We evaluated the effectiveness of a home-based pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) programme on the physical and affective components of dyspnoea assessed by the Dyspnoea-12 (D-12) questionnaire. We also determined the baseline characteristics that contributed to the change in D-12 scores. Methods In this retrospective study, 225 people with COPD (age, 65±11 years; forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV 1 ), 35±15% of predicted value) were enrolled into a person-centric home-based PR, consisting of a weekly supervised 90 min home session during 8 weeks. D-12 questionnaire, health status, anxiety and depressive symptoms, exercise tolerance and general fatigue were assessed at baseline (M0), at the end of PR programme (M2), and 8 (M8) and 14 months (M14) after M0. Multivariable analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) models were performed to identify the baseline characteristics that contributed to the change in D-12 scores. Results Both physical and affective components of dyspnoea and all the other outcome measures were improved at M2, M8 and M14 compared with baseline (p<0.05). Baseline body mass index was the only significant independent predictor of the changes in physical dyspnoea score, while the change in the affective dimension of dyspnoea after PR was associated with FEV 1 , anxiety symptoms and exercise tolerance (6 min stepper test). However, since these variables had only a small impact on the changes in D-12 questionnaire scores, results from the ANCOVA analysis should be taken cautiously. Conclusion Both physical and affective components of dyspnoea were improved, at short term and long term, by 8 weeks of individualised home-based PR. The present results support the importance of assessing dyspnoea as a multidimensional experience during PR, warranting replication by robustly designed randomised and controlled studies.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.416
Threshold uncertainty score0.898

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.347 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it