Patientenfragebogen zur Erfassung der Ursachen interstitieller und seltener Lungenerkrankungen – klinische Sektion der DGP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Interstitial lung diseases (ILD) encompass different heterogeneous, mainly chronic diseases of the pulmonary interstitium and/or alveoli with known and unknown reasons. The diagnostic of ILD is challenging and should be performed interdisciplinary. The medical history is of major importance and therefore, in German-speaking countries the Frankfurter Bogen (published in 1985) was utilised to scrutinise the medical history of the patient. This by now more than 30-years-old questionnaire requires a revision with regard to content and language. METHOD: Under the auspices of the clinical section of the DGP the new Interstitial Lung Disease Patient Questionnaire was developed in collaboration amongst pulmonologist, occupational medicine physicians and psychologists and supported by patient support groups. The questionnaire was finally optimised linguistically with the help of patients. RESULTS: The newly developed patient questionnaire for interstitial and rare lung diseases encompasses different domains: initial and current symptoms, medical history questions including prior drug treatments, previous pulmonary and extrapulmonary diseases, potential exposition at home, work and leisure time as well as family history and travelling. CONCLUSION: The newly developed questionnaire can facilitate the diagnosis in patients with suspicion on interstitial lung disease in clinical routine.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
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".