Pulmonary ventilation defects in older never-smokers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hyperpolarized (3)He MRI previously revealed spatially persistent ventilation defects in healthy, older compared with healthy, younger never-smokers. To understand better the physiological consequences and potential relevance of (3)He MRI ventilation defects, we evaluated (3)He-MRI ventilation-defect percent (VDP) and the effect of deep inspiration (DI) and salbutamol on VDP in older never-smokers. To identify the potential determinants of ventilation defects in these subjects, we evaluated dyspnea, pulmonary function, and cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) measurements, as well as occupational and second-hand smoke exposure. Fifty-two never-smokers (71 ± 6 yr) with no history of chronic respiratory disease were evaluated. During a single visit, pulmonary function tests, CPET, and (3)He MRI were performed and the Burden of Obstructive Lung Disease questionnaire administered. For eight of 52 subjects, there was spirometry evidence of airflow limitation (Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease-Unclassified, I, and II), and occupational exposure was reported in 13 of 52 subjects. In 13 of 52 (25%) subjects, there were no ventilation defects and in 39 of 52 (75%) subjects, ventilation defects were observed. For those subjects with ventilation defects, six of 39 showed a VDP response to DI/salbutamol. Ventilation heterogeneity and VDP were significantly greater, and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)/forced vital capacity was significantly lower (P < 0.05) for subjects with ventilation defects with a response to DI/salbutamol than subjects with ventilation defects without a response to DI/salbutamol and subjects without ventilation defects. In a step-wise, forward multivariate model, FEV1, inspiratory capacity, and airway resistance significantly predicted VDP (R(2) = 0.45, P < 0.001). In conclusion, most never-smokers had normal spirometry and peripheral ventilation defects not reversed by DI/salbutamol; such ventilation defects were likely related to irreversible airway narrowing/collapse but not to dyspnea and decreased exercise capacity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".