Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anna J Hussey,1 Kevin Wing,2 Madonna Ferrone,1,3 Christopher J Licskai1,4â 6 1Asthma Research Group Windsor-Essex County Inc., Windsor, ON, Canada; 2London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK; 3Hotel-Dieu Grace Healthcare, Windsor, ON, Canada; 4London Health Sciences Centre, London, ON, Canada; 5Lawson Health Research Institute, London, ON, Canada; 6Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, CanadaCorrespondence: Christopher J LicskaiSchulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, CanadaEmail chris.licskai@sjhc.London.on.caPurpose: Integrated disease management (IDM) for COPD in primary care has been primarily investigated under clinical trial conditions. We previously published a randomized controlled trial (RCT) where the IDM intervention improved quality of life (QoL) and exacerbation-related outcomes. In this study, we assess the same IDM intervention in a real-world evaluation and identify patient characteristics associated with improved outcomes.Methods: This historical cohort study included patients enrolled for 12 (± 3 months) in the Best Care COPD IDM program. The main outcome was a ⥠3 point improvement in COPD assessment test (CAT). Secondary outcomes were COPD exacerbations requiring antibiotics and/or prednisone, unscheduled physician visits, emergency department visits and hospitalizations.Results: Data for 571 patients (all patients) were included, 158 met the reference RCT eligibility (RCT matched). Improved QoL was observed in 43% (95% CI:38.9,47.2) of all patients, 47% (95% CI:39.5,55.6) of RCT matched vs 92% (95% CI:79.2,95.1) in the reference RCT intervention arm (n=72). Reductions (12 months IDM vs prior year) were observed in the proportion of patients experiencing exacerbation-related events (all patients): antibiotics/prednisone (â 9.0%,95% CI:-13.9,-3.9); unscheduled physician (â 33.1%,95% CI:-38.2,-27.9); emergency department (â 9.6%,95% CI:-13.5,-5); and hospitalizations (â 6.8%,95% CI:-10.0,-3.7). For the RCT matched group all reductions were comparable to the reference RCT intervention arm. The strongest predictors of improved QoL were baseline CAT, CAT⥠20 vs CAT< 10 (OR 15.6,95% CI:7.91,30.83), GOLD group B (OR 6.4,95% CI:3.42,11.85) and D (OR 5.64,95% CI:2.80,11.37) vs GOLD group A. Patients with prior antibiotic/prednisone use, FEV1 < 30% predicted and GOLD group D were less likely to have no urgent health service utilization (OR 0.5,95% CI:0.30,0.68), (OR 0.2,95% CI:0.07,0.78) and (OR 0.3,95% CI:0.14,0.51), respectively.Conclusion: Best Care COPD improved QoL and reduced exacerbation-related outcomes in a manner directionally similar to the RCT from which it emanated. Baseline QoL, exacerbation history, and GOLD category were identified as possible predictors of IDM impact and will inform future program development and resource allocation.Keywords: chronic disease management, COPD assessment test, health service utilization, health status, quality of life
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".