Drug-associated Organizing Pneumonia: High-resolution CT Findings in 9 Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the high-resolution computed tomography appearances of drug-associated organizing pneumonia (OP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nine patients with clinical and biopsy proven drug-associated OP were included in the study. High-resolution computed tomography exams were retrospectively reviewed by 2 observers for the presence, extent, and distribution of parenchymal abnormalities. RESULTS: The commonest findings consisted of air space consolidation (n = 8) and ground-glass opacification (n = 7). The air space consolidation was bilateral and asymmetric in 7 patients, symmetric in 1 patient and in all cases involved mainly the peribronchial or subpleural regions or both. The ground-glass opacities were predominantly bilateral and asymmetric in 6 patients and unilateral in 1 patient. They had a patchy distribution in 4 patients, were diffuse in 2 patients, and subpleural in 1 patient. CONCLUSION: Drug-associated OP most commonly presents with bilateral, asymmetrical air space consolidation in a predominantly peribronchial and subpleural distribution.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".