Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bronchopulmonary dysplasia and emphysema are significant global health problems at the extreme stages of life. Both are characterized by arrested alveolar development or loss of alveoli, respectively. Both lack effective treatment strategies. Knowledge about the genetic control of branching morphogenesis in mammals derives from investigations of the respiratory system in Drosophila, but mechanisms that regulate alveolar development remain poorly understood. Even less is known about regulation of the growth and development of the pulmonary vasculature. Understanding how alveoli and the underlying capillary network develop, and how these mechanisms are disrupted in disease states, are critical for developing effective therapies for lung diseases characterized by impaired alveolar structure. Recent observations have challenged old notions that the development of the blood vessels in the lung passively follows that of the airways. Rather, increasing evidence suggests that lung blood vessels actively promote alveolar growth during development and contribute to the maintenance of alveolar structures throughout postnatal life. Our working hypothesis is that disruption of angiogenesis impairs alveolarization, and that preservation of vascular growth and endothelial survival promotes growth and sustains the architecture of the distal airspace. Furthermore, the explosion of interest in stem cell biology suggests potential roles for endothelial progenitor cells in the pathogenesis or treatment of lung vascular disease. In this Pulmonary Perspective, we review recent data on the importance of the lung circulation, specifically examining the relationship between dysmorphic vascular growth and impaired alveolarization, and speculate on how these new insights may lead to novel therapeutic strategies for bronchopulmonary dysplasia.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
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".