Lung function and symptom recovery in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with pneumonic and non-pneumonic exacerbations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE Acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) accelerate decline in lung function and are associated with hospitalization. Patients with COPD are at risk for community acquired pneumonia (CAP). There may be a benefit to distinguish between these entities.OBJECTIVES The objectives of this research were to assess differences in initial presentation and short-term lung function and symptom recovery in patients with COPD hospitalized for AECOPD or CAP.METHODS A single center, non-interventional, prospective cohort study of patients with COPD hospitalized with AECOPD or CAP was used. Baseline characteristics were collected. Spirometry was obtained on admission, at discharge, and 6-wk post-discharge. The primary outcome was change in forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1%) predicted over time. COPD Assessment Test (CAT) was used to assess symptom burden on admission and 6-wk post-discharge.MAIN RESULTS A total of 54 patients were recruited, all with at least moderate airflow obstruction. On admission, there were higher levels of CRP in COPD with CAP compared to AECOPD (86.4 [SD 81.9] vs 33.5 [35.4]). There was a statistically significant difference in FEV1% predicted (p = 0.0038) and CAT score (p = 0.0005) over time, after adjusting for presence of CAP. However, there was no difference in FEV1% predicted (p = 0.7184) or CAT score (p = 0.441), between those with an AECOPD and COPD with CAP, after adjusting for time. Average length of stay in hospital was longer in COPD with CAP than for AECOPD (11.0 [10.2] versus 6.9 [4.5] days).CONCLUSIONS Time is the principal factor in short term lung function and symptom recovery in patients with COPD hospitalized for acute respiratory decompensation.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".