MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150686582 · doi:10.1183/09031936.00000507

Three-dimensional computed tomography imaging in an animal model of emphysema

2007· article· en· W2150686582 on OpenAlexafffund
Aaron Froese, Kjetil Ask, Renée Labiris, Troy Farncombe, David Warburton, Mark D. Inman, Jack Gauldie, Martin Kolb

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsLungComputed tomographyMedicineQuantitative computed tomographyTomographyNuclear medicineAnimal modelRadiologyLung volumesLung diseasePathologyInternal medicineBone density

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emphysema is a major health problem and novel drugs are needed. Animal disease models are pivotal in their development, but the validity and sensitivity of current tools for the evaluation of drug efficacy is limited. The usefulness of micro computed tomography (CT) as an innovative tool to assess emphysema in a mouse model was investigated. Serial CT scans were performed in bi-weekly intervals in Smad3 knockout (KO) mice, which spontaneously develop airspace enlargement. Lung density was quantified in two- and three-dimensional images and correlated to mean linear intercept and lung compliance. CT scans of Smad3 KO lungs revealed a significant decrease in lung density at age 8 weeks and a further progression at age 14 weeks with respect to age-matched wild-type (WT) animals. Emphysema could be reliably assessed with both the two- and three-dimensional approach, but the three-dimensional approach was superior, due to normalisation to lung volumes and less variability. Lung compliance by week 14 was 0.053+/-0.005 and 0.034+/-0.002% of maximum volume.cmH(2)O(-1) for KO and WT mice, respectively, reflecting significant physiologically relevant emphysema. Small animal computed tomography imaging and density quantification in a reconstructed three-dimensional image is a useful tool for quantifying emphysematous changes in an animal disease model. It adds significant information to conventional assessment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations37
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory JournalSame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207