MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404827188 · doi:10.1136/bmjresp-2023-001709

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease as a risk factor for cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4404827188 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open Respiratory Research · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTianjin Science and Technology ProgramNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineCOPDCochrane LibraryMeta-analysisSubgroup analysisMEDLINESystematic reviewData extractionCohort studyRisk factorCognitionPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment is affecting plenty of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and it is the main leading cause of quality of life to varying degrees. However, there are still wide discrepancies in these prevalence rates can be attributed to the diversity in study designs, participant age ranges, inclusion criteria and the methodologies used for assessment. Previous studies revealed the association between COPD and cognitive impairment, but the conclusions remain controversial. OBJECTIVES: The current systematic review aimed to investigate whether COPD is an independent risk factor for cognitive impairment. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database, Wanfang Database, Chinese Biomedical Database and Weipu Database were searched from inception to 1 December 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: The inclusion criteria involved studies that reported cognitive impairment in COPD. We just included cohort designs, published in English or Chinese language. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently extracted and assessed the quality of data using Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. The outcomes were assessed with random-effects model and reported as the HR with 95% CI using the Review Manager software. RESULTS: 12 studies from 10 articles reporting on 625 644 people were included. The findings indicated that compared with those without COPD at baseline, patients with COPD were associated with an increased risk of cognitive impairment. Subgroup analysis showed the association was not significantly different in sex and age, and the subgroup supports that COPD has a higher risk of non-amnestic mild cognitive impairment (na-MCI) than amnestic MCI. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with COPD have a higher risk of developing cognitive impairment and are more likely to cause na-MCI compared with those without COPD, and this risk is not affected by gender or age. Therefore, continuous monitoring of cognitive function in COPD is critical. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021285913.

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.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.637
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.008
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.280
GPT teacher head0.520
Teacher spread0.240 · 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