MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106673964 · doi:10.1183/09031936.03.00089702

Estimation of lung growth using computed tomography

2003· article· en· W2106673964 on OpenAlexaff
Pim A. de Jong, Yasutaka Nakano, Maarten H. Lequin, Peter Merkus, Harm A.W.M. Tiddens, James C. Hogg, Harvey O. Coxson

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInhalation and Respiratory Drug Delivery
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalVancouver Hospital and Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLungLung volumesComputed tomographyMedicineNuclear medicineFunctional residual capacityTomographyVolume (thermodynamics)RadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anatomical studies suggest that normal lungs grow by rapid alveolar addition until about 2 yrs of age followed by a gradual increase in alveolar dimensions. The aim of this study was to examine the hypothesis that normal lung growth can be monitored by computed tomography (CT). Therefore, the gas volume per gram of lung tissue was estimated from measurements of lung density obtained from CT scans performed on children throughout the growth period. CT scans were performed on 17 males and 18 females, ranging in age from 15 days-17.6 yrs. CT-measured lung weight was correlated with predicted post mortem values and CT measured gas volume with predicted values of functional residual capacity. The median value for lung expansion was 1.86 mL x g(-1) at 15 days, decreased to 0.79 mL x g(-1) by 2 yrs and then increased steadily to 5.07 mL x g(-1) at 17 yrs. Computed tomography scans can be used to estimate lung weight, gas volume and expansion of normal lungs during the growth period. The increase in the lung expansion after the age of 2 yrs suggests progressive alveolar expansion with increasing lung volume.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.249 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations52
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory JournalSame topicInhalation and Respiratory Drug DeliveryFrench-language works237,207