Review of Recent Advances in Fluorescence Bronchoscopy in Early Localization of Central Airway Lung Cancer
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
Centrally located lung cancers are radiologically occult until so far advanced as to have a low cure rate or require extensive resection for cure, but at a cost of high morbidity. These cancers represent about one-fifth of new lung cancers. Autofluorescence bronchoscopy appears to be an important tool in localizing premalignant and early malignant lesions in the large central airways, particularly when applied to high-risk patients. Applications include studies of molecular biology of premalignancy and early malignancy, chemoprevention studies, endobronchial therapy studies, localization of synchronous tumors, estimation of the extent of field cancerization, and better estimation of resection margins. Autofluorescence bronchoscopy appears to be significantly more sensitive than white light examination but has low specificity. This technology is likely to gain widespread use when evaluation of sputum for malignant changes is both more sensitive and specific, and when its application is demonstrated to reduce mortality in this important subgroup of non-small cell lung cancer patients.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it