Ventilation inhomogeneity in infants with recurrent wheezing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The care of infants with recurrent wheezing relies largely on clinical assessment. The lung clearance index (LCI), a measure of ventilation inhomogeneity, is a sensitive marker of early airway disease in children with cystic fibrosis, but its utility has not been explored in infants with recurrent wheezing. OBJECTIVE: To assess ventilation inhomogeneity using LCI among infants with a history of recurrent wheezing compared with healthy controls. METHODS: This is a case-control study, including 37 infants with recurrent wheezing recruited from outpatient clinics, and 113 healthy infants from a longitudinal birth cohort, the Canadian Healthy Infant Longitudinal Development study. All infants, at a time of clinical stability, underwent functional assessment including multiple breath washout, forced expiratory flows and body plethysmography. RESULTS: LCI z-score values among infants with recurrent wheeze were 0.84 units (95% CI 0.41 to 1.26) higher than healthy infants (mean (95% CI): 0.26 (-0.11 to 0.63) vs -0.58 (-0.79 to 0.36), p<0.001)). Nineteen percent of recurrently wheezing infants had LCI values that were above the upper limit of normal (>1.64 z-scores). Elevated exhaled nitric oxide, but not symptoms, was associated with abnormal LCI values in infants with recurrent wheeze (p=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Ventilation inhomogeneity is present in clinically stable infants with recurrent wheezing.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".