MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Interventional pulmonology: Focus on pulmonary diagnostics

2012· review· en· W1591618646 on OpenAlexaff
Kasia Czarnecka, Kazuhiro Yasufuku

Bibliographic record

VenueRespirology · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiologyMediastinal lymphadenopathyBronchoscopyLung cancerPleural effusionPleural diseaseLungPathologyRespiratory diseaseInternal medicineBiopsy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interventional pulmonology (IP) allows comprehensive assessment of patients with benign and malignant airway, lung parenchymal and pleural disease. This relatively new branch of pulmonary medicine utilizes advanced diagnostic and therapeutic techniques to treat patients with pulmonary diseases. Endobronchial ultrasound revolutionized assessment of pulmonary nodules, mediastinal lymphadenopathy and lung cancer staging allowing minimally invasive, highly accurate assessment of lung parenchymal and mediastinal disease, with both macro- and microscopic tissue characterization including molecular signature analysis. High-spatial resolution, new endobronchial imaging techniques including autofluorescence bronchoscopy, narrow-band imaging, optical coherence tomography and confocal microscopy enable detailed evaluation of airways with increasing role in detection and treatment of malignancies arising in central airways. Precision in peripheral lesion localization has been increased through innovative navigational techniques including navigational bronchoscopy and electromagnetic navigation. Pleural diseases can be assessed with the use of non-invasive pleural ultrasonography, with high sensitivity and specificity for malignant disease detection. Medical pleuroscopy is a minimally invasive technique improving diagnostic safety and precision of pleural disease and pleural effusion assessment. In this review, we discuss the newest advances in diagnostic modalities utilized in IP, indications for their use, their diagnostic accuracy, efficacy, safety and challenges in application of these technologies in assessment of thoracic diseases.

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)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.005

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations29
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRespirologySame topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207