Factors associated with participation in life situations in people with COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To examine potential determinants of participation frequency and limitations in people with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). Methods For this secondary analysis, we grouped the following factors using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) components: age, psychological distress (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)), gait aid use, supplemental oxygen use, grip strength, modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea scale, Short Physical Performance Battery, and Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Participation was measured using the frequency and limitation domains of the Late Life Disability Instrument (LLDI). Relationships between factors and participation were examined using linear regression. Results Ninety-six participants (age 68.7 ± 8.1 yrs; FEV 1 %pred 34 IQR 25–54) were included in the analysis. Factors were linked to four ICF components: activity, body functions, personal, and environmental factors. The final model for LLDI-frequency contained HADS, use of gait aid, and 6MWT (F (3, 81) = 27.69 ( p < .001), R 2 = 0.51), and for LLDI-limitations, the final model included age, HADS, and 6MWT (F (3, 82) = 19.74 ( p < .001), R 2 = 0.42). Discussion Participation in life situations in people with COPD is associated with multiple ICF components. Psychological distress (i.e., anxiety and depression symptoms) and mobility were important determinants of participation frequency and limitations. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these relationships.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".