Deciphering clinical phenotypes in acute viral lower respiratory tract infection: Bronchiolitis is not an island
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bronchiolitis is an internationally recognised diagnosis that is commonly applied to children across healthcare systems. In the UK, 2% of all infants are admitted to paediatric hospitals each year with a diagnosis of bronchiolitis, typically over 6–8 weeks winter peak period. Globally, bronchiolitis is just as common though seasons are more diffuse and variable in tropical climates. For such a common disease, there remain significant gaps in our understanding of its pathophysiology and also its inter-relationship with other common lower respiratory tract disease in young children. This lack of data is now restraining progress in the development of management and therapeutics for the preschool age group who are most affected by lower respiratory tract disease (both for infections, ie, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and for the response to infection, ie, wheeze phenotypes). So the study by Dumas et al in Thorax is welcome, as they attempt to stratify subgroups of patients with a clinical diagnosis of bronchiolitis.1 Yet, despite being a common condition in young children, it has proven challenging to develop an international consensus on what precisely defines bronchiolitis from a clinical perspective and how this differs from other common lower respiratory conditions. Most paediatricians consider that they would instantly recognise a case, but agreement may be less consistent when clinicians are less experienced, children are older, have clinical risk factors or present outside the peak RSV season. In many ways this reflects gaps in our current knowledge about lower respiratory tract disease in young children, as the diagnosis of bronchiolitis is intended to be the clinical representation of typical histological features within the bronchioles of those affected: oedematous bronchioles filled with necrotic epithelium and neutrophils, bound together by mucous.2 As a histological review of only the most severe cases of bronchiolitis (resulting in death) have informed this …
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".