MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965473035 · doi:10.1097/aci.0b013e3282f3b5cb

Airway modeling and remodeling in the pathogenesis of asthma

2008· review· en· W1965473035 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie Warner, Darryl A. Knight

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSt. Paul's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPathogenesisMedicineAsthmaDiseaseImmunologyInflammationAirwayBioinformaticsPathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Asthma remains a severe health problem since current therapies are directed to suppressing, rather than preventing or reversing, the primary disease process. Clearly, a greater understanding of the pathogenesis of asthma is critical to the development of better therapeutic modalities. In this review, we discuss the recent advancements in research targeting the role of airway remodeling in asthma. RECENT FINDINGS: Epithelial fragility and abnormalities are being recognized as important facets of asthma, as are other features of remodeling such as angiogenesis, goblet cell hyperplasia and thickened lamina reticularis. Significantly, these anomalies occur early in disease pathogenesis. However, their impact on disease severity remains unclear. SUMMARY: Although an altered immune response is undoubtedly important to the pathogenesis of asthma, there is increasing evidence that the tissue-specific manifestations occur independently of inflammation and significantly impact on disease development and severity.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations67
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Allergy and Clinical ImmunologySame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207