MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291340068

Delivery characteristics and patients’ handling of two single-dose dry-powder inhalers used in COPD

2011· article· en· W4291340068 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chapman KR, Fogarty CM, C Peckitt, Cheryl Lassen, D Jadayel, Juergen Dederichs, M Dalvi, B Kramer

Bibliographic record

VenueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInhalation and Respiratory Drug Delivery
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNovartis Pharma
KeywordsDry-powder inhalerCOPDMedicineDentistryInternal medicineInhalerAsthma
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kenneth R Chapman1, Charles M Fogarty2, Clare Peckitt3, Cheryl Lassen3, Dalal Jadayel3, Juergen Dederichs4, Mukul Dalvi4, Benjamin Kramer5On behalf of the INDEED (indacaterol: handling and preference evaluation of the Breezhaler device in COPD) study investigators1University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; 2Spartanburg Medical Research, Spartanburg, SC, United States; 3Novartis Horsham Research Centre, Horsham, West Sussex, UK; 4Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland; 5Novartis Pharmaceuticals, East Hanover, NJ, USAAbstract: For optimal efficacy, an inhaler should deliver doses consistently and be easy for patients to use with minimal instruction. The delivery characteristics, patients’ correct use, and preference of two single-dose dry powder inhalers (Breezhaler and HandiHaler) were evaluated in two complementary studies. The first study examined aerodynamic particle size distribution, using inhalation profiles of seven patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The second was an open-label, two-period, 7-day crossover study, evaluating use of the inhalers with placebo capsules by 82 patients with mild to severe COPD. Patients’ correct use of the inhalers was assessed after reading written instructions on Day 1, and after training and 7 days of daily use. Patients’ preference was assessed after completion of both study periods. Patient inhalation profiles showed average peak inspiratory flows of 72 L/minute through Breezhaler and 36 L/minute through HandiHaler. For Breezhaler and HandiHaler, fine particle fractions were 27% and 10%, respectively. In the second study, correct use of Breezhaler and HandiHaler was achieved by >77% of patients for any step after 7 days; 61% of patients showed an overall preference for Breezhaler and 31% for HandiHaler (P = 0.01). Breezhaler is a low-resistance inhaler suitable for use by patients with a range of disease severities. Most patients used both inhalers correctly after 7 days, but more patients showed an overall preference for the Breezhaler compared with the HandiHaler. These are important factors for optimum dose delivery and successful COPD management.Keywords: Breezhaler, HandiHaler, COPD, use, preference, dose delivery

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group)Same topicInhalation and Respiratory Drug DeliveryFrench-language works237,207