MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2746623925 · doi:10.1183/13993003.00244-2017

Changes in magnetic resonance imaging scores and ventilation inhomogeneity in children with cystic fibrosis pulmonary exacerbations

2017· letter· en· W2746623925 on OpenAlexaff
Hartmut Grasemann, Pierluigi Ciet, Reshma Amin, Nancy McDonald, Michelle Klingel, Harm A.W.M. Tiddens, Félix Ratjen, Lars Grosse‐Wortmann

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2017
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCystic fibrosisPulmonary function testingSpirometryExacerbationLung functionLungExhaled breath condensateVentilation (architecture)Internal medicineBronchiectasisLung diseaseCardiologyAsthma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acute pulmonary exacerbations (aPEs) in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) often result in incomplete recovery of lung function despite treatment, and are associated with lung function decline over time [1, 2]. Monitoring is therefore important to detect aPEs early and to track treatment responses. Recent studies testing pulmonary function with multiple breath washout (MBW) have shown that the lung clearance index (LCI), the main outcome measure of MBW, is a sensitive tool to measure early changes in the CF lung [3, 4]. However, the potential role of MBW and LCI in more advanced CF lung disease is currently unclear. In fact, a recent study demonstrated heterogeneous responses in LCI, with a significant proportion of patients with CF showing worsening of LCI with treatment for aPEs [5]. Resolution of mucus plugging, resulting in recruitment of poorly ventilated areas of the lung to MBW, would potentially explain the discordant changes in pulmonary function testing by spirometry and LCI with treatment. Resolution of mucus plugging may explain worsening LCI during pulmonary exacerbation treatment in children with CF

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations26
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory JournalSame topicCystic Fibrosis Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207