MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386547475 · doi:10.1080/24745332.2023.2231451

2023 Canadian Thoracic Society Guideline on Pharmacotherapy in Patients with Stable COPD

2023· article· en· W4386547475 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jean Bourbeau, Mohit Bhutani, Paul Hernandez, Shawn D. Aaron, Marie-France Beauchesne, Sophie B. Kermelly, Anthony D’Urzo, Avtar Lal, François Maltais, Jeffrey Marciniuk, Sunita Mulpuru, Erika Penz, Don D. Sin, Anne Van Dam, Joshua Wald, Brandie Walker, Darcy D. Marciniuk

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Respiratory Critical Care and Sleep Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryMcMaster UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de QuébecOttawa HospitalCanadian Thoracic SocietyMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of OttawaUniversity of TorontoDalhousie UniversityUniversité de MontréalUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversité LavalUniversity of Alberta
FundersPfizer CanadaFundació Institut de Recerca Hospital Universitari Vall d’HebronAlberta InnovatesMerck CanadaUniversity of TorontoAssociation des pharmaciens du CanadaCanadian Lung AssociationUniversity of New South WalesUniversity of AlbertaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCovis PharmaMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityTemple UniversitySanofiGlaxoSmithKlineGrifolsAstraZeneca CanadaTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesAstraZenecaUniversité de MontréalPfizer
KeywordsMedicineGuidelineCOPDSpirometryIntensive care medicinePopulationPhysical therapyPharmacotherapyLamaAzithromycinBronchodilatorInternal medicineAsthmaPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patient care must include confirming a diagnosis with postbronchodilator spirometry. Because of the clinical heterogeneity and the reality that airflow obstruction assessed by spirometry only partially reflects disease severity, a thorough clinical evaluation of the patient should include assessment of symptom burden and risk of exacerbations that permits the implementation of evidence-informed pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions. This guideline provides recommendations from a comprehensive systematic review with a meta-analysis and expert-informed clinical remarks to optimize maintenance pharmacological therapy for individuals with stable COPD, and a revised and practical treatment pathway based on new evidence since the 2019 update of the Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) Guideline. The key clinical questions were developed using the Patients/Population (P), Intervention(s) (I), Comparison/Comparator (C), and Outcome (O) model for 3 questions that focuses on the outcomes of symptoms (dyspnea)/health status, acute exacerbations and mortality. The evidence from this systematic review and meta-analysis leads to the recommendation that all symptomatic patients with spirometry-confirmed COPD should receive long-acting bronchodilator maintenance therapy. Those with moderate to severe dyspnea (modified Medical Research Council ≥2) and/or impaired health status (COPD Assessment Test ≥10) and a low risk of exacerbations should receive combination therapy with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ẞ2-agonist (LAMA/LABA). For those with a moderate/severe dyspnea and/or impaired health status and a high risk of exacerbations should be prescribed triple combination therapy (LAMA/LABA/ICS) azithromycin, roflumilast or N-Acetylcysteine is recommended for specific populations; a recommendation against the use of theophylline, maintenance systemic oral corticosteroids such as prednisone and mono-ICS is made for all COPD patients.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.650
Threshold uncertainty score0.695

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.010

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Respiratory Critical Care and Sleep MedicineSame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207