The prevalence and mortality risks of PRISm and COPD in the United States from NHANES 2007–2012
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We estimated the prevalence and mortality risks of preserved ratio impaired spirometry (PRISm) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the US adult population. METHODS: /FVC cut points by the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD). We compared the prevalence of GOLD stages and PRISm by covariates across the three waves. We estimated adjusted all-cause and cause-specific mortality risks by COPD stage and PRISm using all three waves combined. RESULTS: Prevalence of COPD and PRISm from 2007-2012 ranged from 13.1%-14.3% and 9.6%-10.2%, respectively. We found significant differences in prevalence by sex, age, smoking status, and race/ethnicity. Males had higher rates of COPD regardless of stage, while females had higher rates of PRISm. COPD prevalence increased with age, but not PRISm, which was highest among middle-aged individuals. Compared to current and never smokers, former smokers showed lower rates of PRISm but higher rates of GOLD 1. COPD prevalence was highest among non-Hispanic White individuals, and PRISm was notably higher among non-Hispanic Black individuals (range 31.4%-37.4%). We found associations between PRISm and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.3 95% CI: 1.9-2.9) and various cause-specific deaths (HR ranges: 2.0-5.3). We also found associations between GOLD 2 (HR: 2.1, 95% CI: 1.7-2.6) or higher (HR: 4.2, 95% CI: 2.7-6.5) and all-cause mortality. Cause-specific mortality risk varied within COPD stages but typically increased with higher GOLD stage. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of COPD and PRISm remained stable from 2007-2012. Greater attention should be paid to the potential impacts of PRISm due to its higher prevalence in minority groups and its associations with mortality across various causes including cancer.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".