MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387770740 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3372730/v1

High body mass index and the risk of acute exacerbations in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A meta-analysis and systematic review

2023· preprint· en· W4387770740 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Liuqing Yang, Yuying Wei, Hangqi Ni, Qing Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineUnderweightOverweightCOPDExacerbationBody mass indexInternal medicineObesityMeta-analysisCochrane LibraryRelative riskConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Emerging studies indicated the beneficial role of overweight and obesity regarding the prognosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, it’s controversial that whether high body mass index (BMI) has been associated with the risk of acute exacerbations in COPD. Methods Pubmed, Cochrane Library and Embase database were searched up to March 2023. All studies reported the relationship between BMI and the COPD exacerbation risk were included. The quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle Ottawa scale. The meta-analysis was carried out using Review Manager 5.4 software and StataMP 18.0 . Results A total of 10 studies involving 50573 participants with COPD were included. There were no statistical differences in the acute exacerbation risk for the comparison of high BMI vs. non-high BMI group (relative risks, RRs:1.01, 95%CI:0.94–1.07, p = 0.88) and high BMI vs. normal weight group (RRs: 1.01 95%CI: 0.94–1.05, p = 0.9). Further comparisons of subgroups of high BMI including overweight, obesity, Class I obesity and extreme obesity compared to normal weight group also showed no statistical differences. However, a lower risk of COPD exacerbation was discovered when comparing high weight with underweight group (RRs:0.76, 95%CI: 0.63–0.92, p = 0.005). Moreover, high weight group was associated with a lower risk of severe exacerbations of COPD compared to normal weight group (RRs:0.83, 95%CI:0.79–0.88, P < 0.001), but not differ in the risk of frequent COPD exacerbations compared to normal weight subjects (RR:0.91, 95%CI:0.79–1.05, P = 0.19). Conclusion The present study showed that high BMI group including overweight and obesity plays neither a beneficial nor a disadvantage role on the risk of acute exacerbations in COPD patients compared to normal weight counterparts. However, high BMI induced a lower risk of severe COPD exacerbations compared to the normal weight group and a lower risk of COPD exacerbations compared to underweight subjects.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.030
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research→French-language works237,207→