Activity limitations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: Breathlessness causes limitations in activities of daily living (ADL) in COPD patients. The aims of the study were to determine most prevalent ADL limitations, and to analyze relationship between changes in occupational performance and dyspnea, respiratory and peripheral muscle strength, fatigue and quality of life in COPD. Materials and methods: Thirty-five COPD patients (FEV1 50.6±23.0%) participated. Activity limitations were measured with Canadian Activity Performance Measure (COPM). Patients identified activity limitations due to respiratory disorders in self care, productivity, and leisure. They rated the most important five activities as performance and satisfaction score on 1-10 point scale. Quadriceps and respiratory muscle strength were measured. Dyspnea and fatigue were evaluated with modified Medical Research Council dyspnea (MMRC) scale and Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), respectively. Quality of life was determined with St George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). Results: Seventy seven percent of COPD patients reported difficulty in active recreation and functional mobility, 74% in community management, 60% in socialization, and 51% in personal care. COPM performance score was significantly related with quadriceps strength (r=0.34), inspiratory muscle strength (r=0.37), MMRC (r=-0.52), FSS (r=-0.66), and SGRQ-total scores (r=-0.61, p<0.05). FSS and SGRQ explained 75% of the variance in COPM performance. Conclusion: Performance in ADL is related to respiratory and peripheral muscle strength, dyspnea, fatigue, and quality of life. Fatigue and quality of life are the independent determinants of occupational performance in COPD. ADL performance should be included in pulmonary rehabilitation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".