Interpretation of Transbronchial Lung Biopsies from Lung Transplant Recipients:Inter‐ and Intraobserver Agreement
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transbronchial lung biopsy results are crucial for the management of lung transplant recipients. Little information is available regarding the reliability and reproducibility of the interpretation of transbronchial lung biopsies. OBJECTIVE: To examine the inter-reader variability between two lung pathologists with expertise in lung transplantation. METHODS: Fifty-nine transbronchial lung biopsy specimens were randomly selected. Active infection had been excluded in all cases. The original interpretations (as per the Lung Rejection Study Group) for acute rejection grade included 19 biopsies scored as A0 (none), 14 scored as A1 (minimal), 12 as A2 (mild), 11 as A3 (moderate) and three as A4 (severe). The pathologists worked independently without clinical information or knowledge of the original interpretation. The specimens were graded using the Lung Rejection Study Group criteria for acute rejection (grades A0 to A4), airway inflammation (grades B0 to B4) and bronchiolitis obliterans (C0 absent and C1 present). Between-reader agreement for each category was analyzed using a Kappa statistic. RESULTS: Because many transplant specialists initiate augmented immunosuppression with biopsy grades of A2 or higher, results for each reader were dichotomized as A0/A1 versus A2/A3/A4. Using this dichotomy, there was only moderate agreement (kappa 0.470, P < 0.001) between readers. For categories B and C, the results were dichotomized for the absence or presence of airway inflammation and bronchiolitis obliterans, respectively. The level of agreement between readers was fair for category B (kappa 0.333, P = 0.014) and poor for category C (kappa 0.166, P = 0.108). The intrareader agreement for acute rejection was substantial (kappa 0.795, P = 0.0001; kappa 0.676, P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Because the agreement between expert pathologists is only modest, optimum clinical decision-making requires that transbronchial lung biopsy results be used in an integrated clinical context.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it