MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803995891 · doi:10.1183/16000617.0102-2017

Pulmonary function tests as outcomes for systemic sclerosis interstitial lung disease

2018· review· en· W2803995891 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Review · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Sclerosis and Related Diseases
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsMedicineVital capacityInterstitial lung diseasePulmonary function testingDiffusing capacityInternal medicineClinical endpointSurrogate endpointLungPhysical therapyLung functionRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in systemic sclerosis (SSc). We performed a systematic review to characterise the use and validation of pulmonary function tests (PFTs) as surrogate markers for systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease (SSc-ILD) progression. Five electronic databases were searched to identify all relevant studies. Included studies either used at least one PFT measure as a longitudinal outcome for SSc-ILD progression ( i.e. outcome studies) and/or reported at least one classical measure of validity for the PFTs in SSc-ILD ( i.e. validation studies). This systematic review included 169 outcome studies and 50 validation studies. Diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide ( D LCO ) was cumulatively the most commonly used outcome until 2010 when it was surpassed by forced vital capacity (FVC). FVC (% predicted) was the primary endpoint in 70.4% of studies, compared to 11.3% for % predicted D LCO . Only five studies specifically aimed to validate the PFTs: two concluded that D LCO was the best measure of SSc-ILD extent, while the others did not favour any PFT. These studies also showed respectable validity measures for total lung capacity (TLC). Despite the current preference for FVC, available evidence suggests that D LCO and TLC should not yet be discounted as potential surrogate markers for SSc-ILD progression.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.004

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.234 · 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