Treatment of mild chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alex Chee, Don D SinDepartment of Medicine, Division of Respirology, The University of British Columbia and Providence Heart and Lung Institute and The James Hogg iCAPTURE Center for Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Research, St Paul’s Hospital, Vancouver, BC, CanadaAbstract: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an epidemic in many parts of the world. Most patients with COPD demonstrate mild disease. The cornerstone of management of mild disease is smoking cessation, which is the only proven intervention to relieve symptoms, modify its natural history and reduce mortality. For asymptomatic patients, it is the only required therapy. Short-acting bronchodilators can be added on an as needed basis for those with intermittent symptoms and regularly for those with persistent symptoms. Long-acting bronchodilators can be substituted for those who remain symptomatic despite regular use of short-acting bronchodilators. Inhaled corticosteroids do not modify the natural history of COPD and as such cannot be recommended as standalone therapy for mild COPD. However, for patients with refractory and intractable symptoms, they may be used in combination with long-acting beta-2 agonists. Influenza and pneumococcal vaccination and pulmonary rehabilitation are other therapies that may be considered for select patients with mild disease. In this paper, we summarize the current standard of care for patients with mild COPD.Keywords: COPD, management, mild COPD
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".