Diaphragmatic Contribution to Ventilation in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Part I reports pulmonary function and clinical measurements of 222 patients with ankylosing spondylitis, before and after physical therapy, to quantify thoracic impairment and to evaluate therapeutic effect. Vital capacity and forced expiratory volume remained virtually unchanged; cervical extensibility, lumbar flexibility, and chest expansion improved significantly. Part II reports findings in 25 patients and 25 age-matched normal subjects. The linear momentum of breathing was measured, from which the respiratory muscle balance (rib-cage vs. abdominal breathing) was derived. During normal breathing in supine position the mean diaphragmatic contribution to a tidal volume was 84.8 ± 3.3% SE in the patients and 68.4 ± 1.5% in the normal subjects. In 3 patients with severe ankylosis of cervical and thoracic vertebrae there was paradoxical movement of the chest, resulting in a diaphragmatic contribution of > 100%. An understanding of respiratory muscle function is essential to the formulation of rational physical therapy for patients with such conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".