MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2616268146 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2017.00316

Measuring Ventilatory Activity with Structured Light Plethysmography (SLP) Reduces Instrumental Observer Effect and Preserves Tidal Breathing Variability in Healthy and COPD

2017· article· en· W2616268146 on OpenAlexaff
Marie‐Cécile Nierat, Bruno‐Pierre Dubé, Claudia Llontop, Agnès Bellocq, Lila Layachi Ben Mohamed, Isabelle Rivals, Christian Straus, Thomas Similowski, Pierantonio Laveneziana

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsHôtel-Dieu de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMouthpiecePlethysmographMedicineCOPDBreathingRespiratory systemCardiologyRespiratory rateInternal medicineAnesthesiaHeart rateDentistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of a mouthpiece to measure ventilatory flow with a pneumotachograph (PNT) introduces a major perturbation to breathing (“instrumental/observer effect”) and suffices to modify the respiratory behaviour. Structured light plethysmography (SLP) is a non-contact method of assessment of breathing pattern during tidal breathing. Firstly, we validated the SLP measurements by comparing timing component of the ventilatory pattern obtained by SLP versus PNT under the same condition; secondly, we compared SLP to SLP+PNT measurements of breathing pattern to evaluate the disruption of breathing pattern and breathing variability in healthy and COPD subjects. Measurements were taken during tidal breathing with SLP alone and SLP+PNT recording in 30 COPD and healthy subjects. Measurements included: respiratory frequency (Rf), inspiratory, expiratory and total breath time/duration (TI, TE and TT). Passing-Bablok regression analysis was used to evaluate the interchangeability of timing component of the ventilatory pattern (Rf, TI, TE and TT) between measurements performed under the following experimental conditions: SLP versus PNT, SLP+PNT versus SLP and SLP+PNT versus PNT. The variability of different ventilatory variables was assessed through their coefficients of variation (CVs). In healthy: Passing-Bablok regression proved high interchangeability of Rf, TI, TE and TT between measurements obtained under the three experimental conditions (SLP versus PNT, SLP+PNT versus SLP and SLP+PNT versus PNT). All the CVs describing "traditional" ventilatory variables (Rf, TI, TE, TI/TE and TI/TT) were significantly smaller in SLP+PNT condition. This was not the case for more "specific" SLP-derived variables. In COPD: Passing-Bablok regression proved high interchangeability of Rf, TI, TE and TT between measurements obtained under SLP versus PNT and SLP+PNT versus PNT and for Rf, TE and TT under SLP+PNT versus SLP. However, most discrete variables were significantly different between the SLP and SLP+PNT conditions and CVs were significantly lower when COPD patients were assessed in the SLP+PNT condition. Measuring ventilatory activity with SLP preserves resting tidal breathing variability, reduces instrumental observer effect and avoids any disruptions in breathing pattern induced by the use of PNT-mouthpiece-nose-clip combination.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations23
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PhysiologySame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207