MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pooled Cohort Probability Score for Subclinical Airflow Obstruction

2022· article· en· W4212846111 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the American Thoracic Society · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Institute on Minority Health and Health DisparitiesNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Human Genome Research InstituteNational Institute of Nursing ResearchNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsSpirometryCOPDCohortAsthmaConfidence intervalPopulationVital capacityPulmonary function testingAirway obstruction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rationale Early detection of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a public health priority. Airflow obstruction is the single most important risk factor for adverse COPD outcomes, but spirometry is not routinely recommended for screening. Objectives To describe the burden of subclinical airflow obstruction (SAO) and to develop a probability score for SAO to inform potential detection and prevention programs. Methods Lung function and clinical data were harmonized and pooled across nine U.S. general population cohorts. Adults with respiratory symptoms, inhaler use, or prior diagnosis of COPD or asthma were excluded. A probability score for prevalent SAO (forced expiratory volume in 1 second/forced vital capacity < 0.70) was developed via hierarchical group-lasso regularization from clinical variables in strata of sex and smoking status, and its discriminative accuracy for SAO was assessed in the pooled cohort as well as in an external validation cohort (NHANES [National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey] 2011–2012). Incident hospitalizations and deaths due to COPD (respiratory events) were defined by adjudication or administrative criteria in four of nine cohorts. Results Of 33,546 participants (mean age 52 yr, 54% female, 44% non-Hispanic White), 4,424 (13.2%) had prevalent SAO. The incidence of respiratory events (N at-risk = 14,024) was threefold higher in participants with SAO versus those without (152 vs. 39 events/10,000 person-years). The probability score, which was based on six commonly available variables (age, sex, race and/or ethnicity, body mass index, smoking status, and smoking pack-years) was well calibrated and showed excellent discrimination in both the testing sample (C-statistic, 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80–0.82) and in NHANES (C-statistic, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.80–0.86). Among participants with predicted probabilities ⩾ 15%, 3.2 would need to undergo spirometry to detect one case of SAO. Conclusions Adults with SAO demonstrate excess respiratory hospitalization and mortality. A probability score for SAO using commonly available clinical risk factors may be suitable for targeting screening and primary prevention strategies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the American Thoracic SocietySame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207