MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W116275709 · doi:10.1155/2005/759070

Aspergillus‐Related Lung Disease

2005· review· en· W116275709 on OpenAlexaff
Alia Al-Alawi, C. Frank Ryan, Julia Flint, Néstor L. Müller

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Respiratory Journal · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAspergillusLung diseaseLungDiseaseIntensive care medicineMicrobiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aspergillus is a ubiquitous dimorphic fungus that causes a variety of human diseases ranging in severity from trivial to life-threatening, depending on the host response. An intact host defence is important to prevent disease, but individuals with pre-existing structural lung disease, atopy, occupational exposure or impaired immunity are susceptible. Three distinctive patterns of aspergillus-related lung disease are recognized: saprophytic infestation of airways, cavities and necrotic tissue; allergic disease including extrinsic allergic alveolitis, asthma, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis, bronchocentric granulomatosis and chronic eosinophilic pneumonia; and airway and tissue invasive disease -- pseudomembranous tracheobronchitis, acute bronchopneumonia, angioinvasive aspergillosis, chronic necrotizing aspergillosis and invasive pleural disease. A broad knowledge of these clinical presentations and a high index of suspicion are required to ensure timely diagnosis and treatment of the potentially lethal manifestations of aspergillus-related pulmonary disease. In the present report, the clinical, radiographic and pathological aspects of the various aspergillus-related lung diseases are briefly reviewed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations59
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Respiratory JournalSame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207