Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Lung transplant is the preferred treatment for several end-stage pulmonary diseases. The first successful human lung transplant was performed by the Toronto Group in 1983 [1]. Objectives: This article discusses our initial experience with single and double lung transplant. Study Design: A retrospective analysis was done on 11 consecutive lung transplants for end-stage pulmonary diseases performed at our institution between 2008 and 2010. Materials and Methods: Major indications were idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (n = 6), bronchiectasis (n = 2), primary pulmonary hypertension (n = 1), lymphangioleiomyomatosis (n = 1), and scleroderma (n = 1). Results: Two patients (18.2%) died within 30 days of surgery. One- and 2-year survival rates for the recipients were 81.8% and 72.7%. Sepsis caused the deaths of 2 recipients. Conclusions: Although sepsis and chronic rejection limit the benefits, lung transplant gives many patients with end-stage pulmonary disease the ability for a better quality of life.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".