Sex differences in physiological progression of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, incidence is higher in males, and females may have better survival. The aim of the present study was to determine whether the rate of increase in desaturation during serial 6-min walk testing would be greater, and survival worse, for males versus females. Serial changes in the percentage of maximum desaturation area (DA) over 1 yr were estimated using mixed models in 215 patients. DA was defined as the total area above the curve created using desaturation percentage values observed during each minute of the 6-min walk test. Multivariate Cox regression assessed survival differences. Adjusting for baseline DA, 6-min walk distance, change in 6-min walk distance over time and smoking history, the percentage of maximum DA increased by an average of 2.83 and 1.37% per month for males and females, respectively. Females demonstrated better survival overall, which was more pronounced in patients who did not desaturate below 88% on ambulation at baseline and after additionally adjusting for 6-month relative changes in DA and forced vital capacity. These data suggest that differences in disease progression contribute to, but do not completely explain, better survival of females with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".