Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(3)
Exact(10)
"We're mild gold bulls".
Severity!! FEV1 % predicted |- | Mild (GOLD 1) || ≥80 |- | Moderate (GOLD 2)|| 50 79 |- | Severe (GOLD 3) || 30 49 |- | Very severe (GOLD 4 || The modified British Medical Research Council questionnaire (mMRC) or the COPD assessment test (CAT) are simple questionnaires that may be used to determine the severity of symptoms.
To better understand the pathobiology of disease severity in COPD, we searched for genes differentially expressed in lung tissue using microarrays between mild (GOLD Stage I) and moderate (GOLD Stage II) COPD patients, stratifying them by FEV1.
We identified eight genes capable of classifying mild (GOLD I) and moderate (GOLD II) COPD patients in the TPCH-training set, TPCH-test set and in external validation datasets [9], [10].
These 46 genes were 67% accurate in classifying mild (GOLD stage I) and moderate (GOLD stage II) COPD using LOOCV with diagonal linear discriminate algorithm in the training samples.
Among 4,291 never smokers, 6.6% met criteria for mild (GOLD stage I) COPD, and 5.6% met criteria for moderate to very severe (GOLD stage II+) COPD.
Similar(50)
The patients included in the study complied with the following criteria: a diagnosis of mild COPD (GOLD I), moderate COPD (GOLD II) or severe COPD (GOLD III) [ 1].
The postbronchodilator FEV1 and FEV1/FVC measurements made during the preoperative assessment of lung function were used to assign these donated tissues to 'At Risk' controls (n=28), mild COPD (GOLD 1) (n=21) and moderate COPD (GOLD 2) (n=25).
In our study population, 20% of the patients had mild COPD (GOLD grade I), and almost 70% of the patients had moderate COPD (GOLD grade II).
Physical activity declines in patients with COPD, even those with mild disease (GOLD stage 2) and people with mild symptoms (MRC grade 2) [ 19].
This could indicate those at risk of, or with mild COPD (GOLD stages 0 or 1 respectively) [ 25], or those presenting with mucus hypersecretion [ 26].
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com