Accumulating Evidence for Increased Velocity of Airway Smooth Muscle Shortening in Asthmatic Airway Hyperresponsiveness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It remains unclear whether airway smooth muscle (ASM) mechanics is altered in asthma. While efforts have originally focussed on contractile force, some evidence points to an increased velocity of shortening. A greater rate of airway renarrowing after a deep inspiration has been reported in asthmatics compared to controls, which could result from a shortening velocity increase. In addition, we have recently shown in rats that increased shortening velocity correlates with increased muscle shortening, without increasing muscle force. Nonetheless, establishing whether or not asthmatic ASM shortens faster than that of normal subjects remains problematic. Endobronchial biopsies provide excellent tissue samples because the patients are well characterized, but the size of the samples allows only cell level experiments. Whole human lungs from transplant programs suffer primarily from poor patient characterization, leading to high variability. ASM from several animal models of asthma has shown increased shortening velocity, but it is unclear whether this is representative of human asthma. Several candidates have been suggested as responsible for increased shortening velocity in asthma, such as alterations in contractile protein expression or changes in the contractile apparatus structure. There is no doubt that more remains to be learned about the role of shortening velocity in asthma.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".