MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multiple-Breath Washout as a Lung Function Test in Cystic Fibrosis. A Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Workshop Report

2015· article· en· W1874133486 on OpenAlexaff
Padmaja Subbarao, Carlos Milla, Paul Aurora, Jane C. Davies, Stephanie D. Davis, Graham L. Hall, Sonya L. Heltshe, Philipp Latzin, Anders Lindblad, Jessica E. Pittman, Paul D. Robinson, Margaret Rosenfeld, Florian Singer, Timothy D. Starner, Félix Ratjen, Wayne J. Morgan

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the American Thoracic Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
KeywordsMedicineCystic fibrosisIntensive care medicineLung functionClinical trialLung diseasePulmonary function testingPediatricsLungPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The lung clearance index (LCI) is a lung function parameter derived from the multiple-breath washout (MBW) test. Although first developed 60 years ago, the technique was not widely used for many years. Recent technological advances in equipment design have produced gains in popularity for this test among cystic fibrosis (CF) researchers and clinicians, particularly for testing preschool-aged children. LCI has been shown to be feasible and sensitive to early CF lung disease in patients of all ages from infancy to adulthood. A workshop was convened in January 2014 by the North American Cystic Fibrosis Foundation to determine the readiness of the LCI for use in multicenter clinical trials as well as clinical care. The workshop concluded that the MBW text is a valuable potential outcome measure for CF clinical trials in preschool-aged patients and in older patients with FEV1 in the normal range. However, gaps in knowledge about the choice of device, gas, and standardization across systems are key issues precluding its use as a clinical trial end point in infants. Based on the current evidence, there are insufficient data to support the use of LCI or MBW parameters in the routine clinical management of patients with CF.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.341 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations122
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the American Thoracic SocietySame topicCystic Fibrosis Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207