Significance of precipitins and asymptomatic lymphocytic alveolitis: a 20‐yr follow-up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What is the significance of serum precipitins and lymphocytic alveolitis in a healthy subject exposed to antigens responsible for hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP)? This study was done to evaluate the 20-yr outcome of asymptomatic dairy farmers with or without precipitins or lymphocytic alveolitis in their bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL). Twenty-seven of the initial 43 farmers were restudied. Of the missing 16, 11 refused the follow-up, three had died and two could not be located. The restudied farmers had a clinical evaluation, lung function tests and a high resolution computed tomography (HRCT). Only one subject, an asthmatic, had dyspnoea, none described present or past symptoms suggestive of HP. Of those who were no longer on the farm, none had quit because of respiratory problems. Lung function changes were as expected with aging. The only difference was that farmers with positive precipitins had a statistically significant greater decrease in their forced expiratory volume in one second than the sero-negative farmers. Four HRCTs showed signs of minimal parenchymal abnormalities; these were not more prevalent for subjects with or without precipitins or BAL lymphocytosis. Serum precipitins and asymptomatic lymphocytic alveolitis in an asymptomatic, exposed dairy farmer have no clinically meaningful long-term consequences.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".