MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2167585309 · doi:10.1080/17471060500462492

Surfactant in lung injury: How important is it?

2006· article· en· W2167585309 on OpenAlexaff
Jim F. Lewis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Organ Dysfunction · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulmonary surfactantLungMedicinePneumoniaDiffuse alveolar damageRespiratory distressClinical trialAsthmaIntensive care medicineImmunologyInternal medicineAnesthesiaAcute respiratory distressBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pulmonary surfactant lines the inner surface of the lung and functions to lower surface tension within the alveolar space, thus minimizing the work of breathing. Surfactant also serves in a host defense role by enhancing bacterial and viral clearance and killing, as well as downregulating, the host inflammatory response. Alterations of the pulmonary surfactant system contribute to the lung dysfunction associated with acute lung injury and the acute respiratory distress syndrome. As a result, exogenous surfactant has been evaluated as a treatment modality for these patients. Unfortunately, the results of these clinical trials have been inconsistent, although a recent large Phase III study showed that patients with direct lung injuries induced by pneumonia and/or aspiration may specifically benefit from this therapy. Future research directions in the surfactant field include prospective clinical trials specifically focused on targeted patient populations as well as studies evaluating the role of the surfactant system in other inflammatory lung diseases such as bronchial asthma and bacterial pneumonia.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.011
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0090.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Organ Dysfunction→Same topicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→