MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393001966 · doi:10.3389/fmed.2024.1289259

Sex-differences in COPD: from biological mechanisms to therapeutic considerations

2024· article· en· W4393001966 on OpenAlexafffund
Kathryn M. Milne, Reid Mitchell, Olivia N. Ferguson, Alanna S. Hind, Jordan A. Guenette

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsCOPDMedicinePulmonary rehabilitationSputumPulmonary function testingAirwayLungRespiratory systemPulmonary diseaseVentilation (architecture)Physical therapyIntensive care medicineInternal medicinePathologyAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a heterogeneous respiratory condition characterized by symptoms of dyspnea, cough, and sputum production. We review sex-differences in disease mechanisms, structure-function-symptom relationships, responses to therapies, and clinical outcomes in COPD with a specific focus on dyspnea. Females with COPD experience greater dyspnea and higher morbidity compared to males. Imaging studies using chest computed tomography scans have demonstrated that females with COPD tend to have smaller airways than males as well as a lower burden of emphysema. Sex-differences in lung and airway structure lead to critical respiratory mechanical constraints during exercise at a lower absolute ventilation in females compared to males, which is largely explained by sex differences in maximum ventilatory capacity. Females experience similar benefit with respect to inhaled COPD therapies, pulmonary rehabilitation, and smoking cessation compared to males. Ongoing re-assessment of potential sex-differences in COPD may offer insights into the evolution of patterns of care and clinical outcomes in COPD patients over time.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations36
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MedicineSame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207