CT-Definable Subtypes of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Statement of the Fleischner Society
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this statement is to describe and define the phenotypic abnormalities that can be identified on visual and quantitative evaluation of computed tomographic (CT) images in subjects with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), with the goal of contributing to a personalized approach to the treatment of patients with COPD. Quantitative CT is useful for identifying and sequentially evaluating the extent of emphysematous lung destruction, changes in airway walls, and expiratory air trapping. However, visual assessment of CT scans remains important to describe patterns of altered lung structure in COPD. The classification system proposed and illustrated in this article provides a structured approach to visual and quantitative assessment of COPD. Emphysema is classified as centrilobular (subclassified as trace, mild, moderate, confluent, and advanced destructive emphysema), panlobular, and paraseptal (subclassified as mild or substantial). Additional important visual features include airway wall thickening, inflammatory small airways disease, tracheal abnormalities, interstitial lung abnormalities, pulmonary arterial enlargement, and bronchiectasis.
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 | 0.027 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".