Assessment of the relationship between cognitive functions and inhaler device compliance in elderly COPD patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Proper use of inhaler devices is one of the most critical components in COPD treatment. We sought to investigate the factors affecting appropriate use and adherence to inhaler devices in elderly COPD patients. Method: Demographic data collection, spirometry, Morisky-Green-Levine Medication Adherence Scale, inhalation device usage scoring performed by an experienced chest physician. Each patient was evaluated by a geriatrician for cognitive functions. The Quick Mild Cognitive Impairment Screen (QMCI), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE), Clock-Drawing Test (CDT) were carried out for 45 patients. We included 45 patients (Male/Female: 38/7) with a mean age of 71.5±4.5 years. The inhalation device usage score had a significantly positive correlation with QMCI, MoCA, MMSE, and CDT (p=0,006, 0,001, 0,001, 0,045). The higher MMRC, CAT score, ADO index were related with poor inhalation device usage score (p=0.002, p=0.004, p=0.019 respectively). Conclusion: Evaluation of cognitive functions seems to be critical in elderly COPD patients to increase inhaler device adherence.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".