MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390547245 · doi:10.1164/rccm.202307-1184oc

Physiological Characterization of Preserved Ratio Impaired Spirometry in the CanCOLD Study: Implications for Exertional Dyspnea and Exercise Intolerance

2024· article· en· W4390547245 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Devin B. Phillips, Matthew D. James, Sandra G. Vincent, Amany F. Elbehairy, J. Alberto Neder, Miranda Kirby, Josuel Ora, Andrew G. Day, Wan C. Tan, Jean Bourbeau, Denis E. O’Donnell

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreProvidence Health Care Research InstituteUniversity of British ColumbiaYork UniversityKingston Health Sciences CentreKingston General HospitalToronto Metropolitan UniversitySt. Paul's HospitalQueen's University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineSpirometryAir trappingCardiologyDynamic hyperinflationCOPDInternal medicineLung volumesVO2 maxExercise intolerancePopulationPhysical therapyAnesthesiaPulmonary function testingLungHeart rateAsthmaBlood pressureHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rationale It is increasingly recognized that adults with preserved ratio impaired spirometry (PRISm) are prone to increased morbidity. However, the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms are unknown. Objectives Evaluate the mechanisms of increased dyspnea and reduced exercise capacity in PRISm. Methods We completed a cross-sectional analysis of the CanCOLD (Canadian Cohort Obstructive Lung Disease) population-based study. We compared physiological responses in 59 participants meeting PRISm spirometric criteria (post-bronchodilator FEV1 < 80% predicted and FEV1/FVC ≥ 0.7), 264 control participants, and 170 ever-smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), at rest and during cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Measurements and Main Results Individuals with PRISm had lower total lung, vital, and inspiratory capacities than healthy controls (all P < 0.05) and minimal small airway, pulmonary gas exchange, and radiographic parenchymal lung abnormalities. Compared with healthy controls, individuals with PRISm had higher dyspnea/V˙ o 2 ratio at peak exercise (4.0 ± 2.2 vs. 2.9 ± 1.9 Borg units/L/min; P < 0.001) and lower V˙ o 2peak (74 ± 22% predicted vs. 96 ± 25% predicted; P < 0.001). At standardized submaximal work rates, individuals with PRISm had greater Vt/inspiratory capacity (Vt%IC; P < 0.001), reflecting inspiratory mechanical constraint. In contrast to participants with PRISm, those with COPD had characteristic small airways dysfunction, dynamic hyperinflation, and pulmonary gas exchange abnormalities. Despite these physiological differences among the three groups, the relationship between increasing dyspnea and Vt%IC during cardiopulmonary exercise testing was similar. Resting IC significantly correlated with V˙ o 2peak (r = 0.65; P < 0.001) in the entire sample, even after adjusting for airflow limitation, gas trapping, and diffusing capacity. Conclusions In individuals with PRISm, lower exercise capacity and higher exertional dyspnea than healthy controls were mainly explained by lower resting lung volumes and earlier onset of dynamic inspiratory mechanical constraints at relatively low work rates. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00920348).

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)0.002
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 score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.325 · 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

Citations25
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine→Same topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research→French-language works237,207→