Quantitative Computed Tomography Assessment of Airway Wall Dimensions: Current Status and Potential Applications for Phenotyping Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Airway remodeling is extremely important in the pathophysiology of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Since the site and nature of airflow obstruction was described by Hogg, Thurlbeck, and Macklem, investigators have been looking for methods to noninvasively measure the airway wall dimensions in subjects with and at risk for COPD. The advent and proliferation of computed tomography (CT) initially allowed investigators to quantify changes in lung parenchymal structure in subjects with emphysema, and more recently attention has turned to the measurement of airway wall dimensions. Unfortunately, while the lung density is relatively easy to quantify, reliable airway measurements have proven to be more difficult to obtain. However, recent advances in CT technology and new computer algorithms have changed the way investigators have measured airways using CT, and it is now hoped that many of the early issues surrounding airway measurements can be resolved. The measurement of airway wall dimensions is important because it is well known that chronic airflow limitation can be caused by a combination of airway and parenchymal changes. The phenotypic expression of these different subtypes of COPD is vital because a therapy designed to modulate the inflammation in airways may be contraindicated in subjects with the emphysema phenotype and visa versa. Therefore, these new imaging techniques are very likely to play a front-line role in the study of COPD and will, hopefully, allow clinicians to phenotype individuals, thereby personalizing their treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".