MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Induced sputum cell counts: their usefulness in clinical practice

2000· review· en· W2028738287 on OpenAlexaff
Lata Jayaram, K. Parameswaran, Malcolm R. Sears, Frederick E. Hargreave

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEosinophilicSputumInflammationAirwayMedicineImmunologyAsthmaPathologyTuberculosisSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Airway inflammation is fundamental to the aetiology and persistence of asthma and other airway conditions. The presence and type of airway inflammation can be difficult to detect clinically, delaying the introduction of appropriate treatment. Induced sputum cell counts are a relatively noninvasive, safe and reliable method of identifying airway inflammation. They can accurately discriminate eosinophilic airway inflammation from noneosinophilic airway inflammation, and help guide therapy. Eosinophilic airway inflammation is steroid responsive whilst noneosinophilic (usually neutrophilic) inflammation generally is not. Macrophages containing haemosiderin can be useful in detecting left ventricular dysfunction and macrophages containing lipid are suggestive of oropharyngeal reflux with microaspiration, both of which can complicate or confuse assessment of airway disease. To date, studies using induced sputum are primarily observational. Management studies based on examination of induced sputum are now needed to validate the clinical utility of this test.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.271 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations89
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory JournalSame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207