Update on exhaled nitric oxide in pulmonary disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to assess the inflammatory status of a patient's airway using a noninvasive method is the ideal situation for clinicians. Owing in part to the relationship between the levels of exhaled nitric oxide to inflammation and the ease of the technique, the measurement of the fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (F(E)NO) has achieved considerable attention, particularly with respect to asthma. A multitude of studies have shown that when measured in exhaled air, this unique molecule has the potential to have both diagnostic and therapeutic roles in the clinical setting for many pulmonary diseases. The incorporation of F(E)NO into asthma management and treatment algorithms may help shed further insight on the current control and future risk of patients. Research is ongoing to determine the biology and the benefits of the use of F(E)NO in respiratory conditions in addition to asthma. This review will briefly outline the pathophysiology of nitric oxide, the measurement of F(E)NO and the potential clinical uses of F(E)NO in asthma and a number of other respiratory diseases. Despite its promise, until further research is conducted, the use of F(E)NO cannot be recommended for routine clinical management of respiratory diseases at present, but should be considered as an adjuvant to help guide therapy in certain patients with asthma and in those with eosinophilic bronchitis.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".