MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414873593 · doi:10.58931/crt.2025.1214

Cardiopulmonary Collaboration in Respiratory Care: Shifting the Paradigm

2025· article· en· W4414873593 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pierre Landry

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Respirology Today · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCOPDMepolizumabInhalerLamaDiseaseAsthmaEmergency department

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has evolved from a symptom driven focus to prioritizing the reduction of exacerbations, with a view to preventing morbidity and mortality. This treatment landscape continues to evolve, with biologic therapies on the horizon that promise to substantially alter the current paradigm centred on inhaled therapies. While other jurisdictions have approved dupilumab and mepolizumab as add-on therapies to prevent COPD exacerbations, these options are not yet approved for use in Canada. Regardless of regulatory status, the foundation of COPD therapy remains the same: triple inhaled therapy, combined with inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting anti-muscarinic agents, and long‑acting beta-agonists. At the time of enrolment in the studies, single inhaler triple therapy (SITT) was not yet the standard of care; however, the majority of enrolled patients (over 98%) were receiving all three components. While multiple inhaler triple therapy was permitted, both studies demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in COPD exacerbations. Biologics are intended as an add-on to baseline therapy, yet many patients remain undertreated and lack access to SITT. Our Canadian COPD guidelines have emphasized a clear preference for SITT, advocating for its rapid initiation in highly symptomatic patients, and those at increased risk of exacerbations. SITT has been demonstrated to reduce exacerbations and mortality, contributing to a reduction in hospitalizations and emergency department visits. Nevertheless, many patients remain on inadequate therapy and continue to face an elevated risk of exacerbations, thus predisposing them to increased mortality. In both the ETHOS and IMPACT trials, the most commonly adjudicated causes of death were cardiopulmonary in nature. Single inhaler therapy has been shown to be safe, effective, and economical. The number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent a moderate or severe COPD exacerbation is 1:4, while the number needed to harm (NNH) for pneumonia is 1:33. Despite this favourable profile, there appears to be hesitancy regarding initiation of therapy. Whether this stems from regulatory barriers regarding access to medication, hesitancies based on risk perception pertaining to pneumonia or other adverse events, or gaps in knowledge, this is a situation which deserves urgent attention, in light of the simplicity and effectiveness of this intervention.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.640
Threshold uncertainty score0.965

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.338 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Respirology TodaySame topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsFrench-language works237,207