The acute respiratory distress syndrome
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to examine and discuss the incidence and outcome of patients with the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This is a challenging task, as there is no specific clinical sign or diagnostic test that accurately identifies and adequately defines this syndrome. RECENT FINDINGS: This review will focus on published epidemiological studies reporting population-based incidence of ARDS, as defined by the American-European Consensus Conference criteria. In addition, the current outcome figures for ARDS patients reported in observational and randomized controlled trials will be reviewed. The focus will be on studies published since 2000, when the ARDSnet study on protective mechanical ventilation was published, although particular emphasis will be on those articles published in the last 24 months. SUMMARY: On the basis of current evidence, and despite the order of magnitude of reported European and USA incidence figures, it seems that the incidence and overall mortality of ARDS has not changed substantially since the original ARDSnet study. The current mortality of adult ARDS is still greater than 40%.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it