P086 <break /> Prevalence of finger clubbing in Interstitial Lung Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clubbing of the fingers is associated with a wide range of diseases. It is a typical, but uncommon, finding in patients with interstitial lung diseases (ILD), especially with pulmonary fibrosis. We have established clinics to care for patients with different ILDs, such as idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), sarcoidosis, vasculitis and interstitial lung disease associated with connective tissue disease (ILD-CTD). The observation was made that clubbing of the fingers was more often seen in patients in the IPF clinic than in any of the other clinics. In a retrospective review, we examined how often clubbing was documented on physical examination. Whether clubbing was present or absent was documented most often in patients attending the IPF clinic. The charts of patients with sarcoidosis or vasculitis frequently did not include mention of clubbing. Among patients with ILD-CTD, records usually indicated whether clubbing was found. The prevalence varied however: no patient with scleroderma was documented as having clubbing, despite the presence of advanced ILD with. In contrast, occasional patients with ILD associated with rheumatoid arthritis were found to have clubbing.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".