Occupational hypersensitivity pneumonitis: an EAACI position paper
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
The aim of this document was to provide a critical review of the current knowledge on hypersensitivity pneumonitis caused by the occupational environment and to propose practical guidance for the diagnosis and management of this condition. Occupational hypersensitivity pneumonitis (OHP) is an immunologic lung disease resulting from lymphocytic and frequently granulomatous inflammation of the peripheral airways, alveoli, and surrounding interstitial tissue which develops as the result of a non-IgE-mediated allergic reaction to a variety of organic materials or low molecular weight agents that are present in the workplace. The offending agents can be classified into six broad categories that include bacteria, fungi, animal proteins, plant proteins, low molecular weight chemicals, and metals. The diagnosis of OHP requires a multidisciplinary approach and relies on a combination of diagnostic tests to ascertain the work relatedness of the disease. Both the clinical and the occupational history are keys to the diagnosis and often will lead to the initial suspicion. Diagnostic criteria adapted to OHP are proposed. The cornerstone of treatment is early removal from exposure to the eliciting antigen, although the disease may show an adverse outcome even after avoidance of exposure to the causal agent.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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 it