Pulmonary Exacerbations in Children with Cystic Fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pulmonary exacerbations treated with intravenous antibiotics have significant, well-characterized negative consequences on clinical outcomes in cystic fibrosis (CF). The impact of milder exacerbations in children with CF, commonly treated with oral antibiotics, are less well defined. Pulmonary exacerbations have multiple triggers, but viral infections are particularly common in children. Children with CF and healthy control subjects have similar frequencies of viral respiratory infections, but there is evidence of greater virus-related morbidity in patients with CF, likely due to a combination of increased viral load, more pronounced inflammatory response, and more pronounced impairment in mucociliary clearance. In recent clinical trials in children, definitions have been used that are more symptom based rather than intervention based. These studies have demonstrated differences in the spectrum of symptoms between children and older patients but have also shown that, despite low threshold definitions, a considerable number of patients receive treatment for events not fulfilling the pulmonary exacerbation criteria. Additional research is needed to determine the impact of these milder exacerbations on lung function recovery and time to subsequent exacerbation as well as long-term outcomes such as mortality.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".