Limitations of electronic compensation for measuring plethysmographic airway resistance in infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electronic compensation to overcome thermal artifacts during plethysmographic estimations of airway resistance is now used routinely in adults and school-age children, and was shown to be a valuable means of discriminating airway function between preschool children with and without lung disease. A similar system is now commercially available for infants, which could increase the applicability of this technique. However, we noted marked discrepancies in electronically calculated values of airway resistance in this age group, both with respect to absolute values displayed and marked within-subject variability on a single test occasion. The aim of this technical report is to summarize our recent findings in order to alert other users to potential problems. Airway resistance (R(aw)) was measured in 62 infants (28 with cystic fibrosis (CF); 34 healthy). Three to five epochs of quiet regular tidal breathing were collected in each infant. Marked within-subject, within-test variability was observed, with the median coefficient of variation (CV) being 9.1% (range, 1.2-52.6%) within and 8.5% (0.1-112%) between epochs. Among healthy infants, R(aw) varied from 0.1-6.4 (kPa x liter(-1) x sec), with no relationship to either body or lung size and complete overlap of results with those from infants with CF, despite abnormal lung function in the latter when assessed by other means. The marked within- and between-subject variability in healthy infants, and lack of discriminative power of R(aw) when derived from electronically compensated values, currently preclude application in either clinical or research studies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".