P083 <break /> Oscillometry In Community Practice ILD Is Characterized By Abnormal Reactance But Normal Resistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oscillometry (OS) measures lung mechanics with minimal patient effort, is more sensitive than spirometry, yet is not mentioned in ILD guidelines. Our goal was to compare OS in community practice ILD with COPD. 24 ILD subjects (11 UIP, 4 asbestosis, 3 dermatomyositis, 2 methotrexate, 2 sarcoidosis, 1 silicosis, 1 acute fibrinous and organizing pneumonia), 24 age and sex matched COPD subjects, and 15 COPD-ILD overlap subjects (12 UIP, 2 NSIP, 1 methotrexate) were evaluated. 20 clinic staff served as a healthy comparison group. All subjects underwent 3 measurements of OS (tremoFlo C-100, 5-37Hz). Resistance at 5 Hz (R5), frequency dependence of resistance (R5-R19), reactance at 5 Hz (X5), resonance frequency (Fres), reactance area (AX) and expiratory-inspiratory X5 (ΔX5) were calculated for each subject. Spirometry and diffusing capacity (DLco) were measured within 2±2SD months of OS. Differences for biometrics, spirometry, DLco and ln transformed OS parameters were determined with ANOVA. Only DLco did not significantly differ between all groups (Table 1).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".