MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330157402 · doi:10.2174/1573398x113096660024

Pleuroparenchymal Fibroelastosis: Associations and Underlying Conditions

2014· article· en· W2330157402 on OpenAlexaff
Farnoosh Tayyari, TaeBong Chung, David Hwang

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Respiratory Medicine Reviews · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePathologyLungIdiopathic pulmonary fibrosisParenchymaFibrosisMalignancyPulmonary fibrosisUsual interstitial pneumoniaPathogenesisInterstitial lung diseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pleuroparenchymal fibroelastosis (PPFE) is a clinicopathologic entity characterized by clinical presentation suggestive of a chronic idiopathic interstitial pneumonia, radiologic features of pleural and parenchymal involvement accentuated in the upper lobes, and a constellation of histologic findings including visceral pleural fibrosis and prominent fibroelastosis of the subpleural lung parenchyma. While the large majority of cases of PPFE have been considered idiopathic, development of PPFE in post-bone marrow transplant patients and in lung transplant recipients has recently been reported. Further, with the growing number of idiopathic PPFE cases reported in the literature, interesting patterns of association between PPFE and various clinical conditions – including prior treatment for malignancy, autoimmunity, recurrent infections, and vascular compromise/ischemia – are beginning to emerge. These associations, reviewed here, may offer clues into the pathogenesis of this rare condition. Keywords: Chronic lung allograft dysfunction, graft versus host disease, interstitial lung disease, pleuroparenchymal fibroelastosis, pulmonary fibrosis, pulmonary upper lobe fibrosis, restrictive allograft syndrome.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.263
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Respiratory Medicine ReviewsSame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207