The effect of asthma on the perimeter of the airway basement membrane
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When comparing the pathology of airways in individuals with and without asthma, the perimeter of the basement membrane (Pbm) is used as a marker of airway size, as it is independent of airway smooth muscle shortening or airway collapse. The extent to which the Pbm is itself altered in asthma has not been quantified. The aim of this study was to compare the Pbm from the same anatomical sites in postmortem lungs from subjects with (n = 55) and without (n = 30) asthma (nonfatal or fatal). Large and small airways were systematically sampled at equidistant "levels" from the apical segment of the left upper lobes and anterior and basal segments of the left lower lobes of lungs fixed in inflation. The length of the Pbm was estimated from cross sections of airway at each relative level. Linear mixed models were used to investigate the relationships between Pbm and sex, age, height, smoking status, airway level, and asthma group. The final model showed significant interactions between Pbm and airway level in small (<3 mm) airways, in subjects having asthma (P < 0.0001), and by sex (P < 0.0001). No significant interactions for Pbm between asthma groups were observed for larger airways (equivalent to a diameter of ∼3 mm and greater) or smoking status. Asthma is not associated with remodeling of the Pbm in large airways. In medium and small airways, the decrease in Pbm in asthma (≤20%) would not account for the published differences in wall area or area of smooth muscle observed in cases of severe asthma.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".