Design of a Study Assessing Disease Behaviour During the Peri-Diagnostic Period in Patients with Interstitial Lung Disease: The STARLINER Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: This study will aim to characterise disease behaviour during the peri-diagnostic period in patients with suspected interstitial lung disease (ILD), including idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), using daily home spirometry and accelerometry. Additionally, this study will aim to increase collaboration between secondary and tertiary centres using a digital collaboration platform. METHODS: The STARLINER study (NCT03261037) will enrol approximately 180 symptomatic patients aged 50 years or more with radiological evidence of ILD/IPF from community and tertiary centres in Canada and Europe. Approximately two-thirds of sites will be community centres. Patients will be followed during pre-diagnosis (inclusion to diagnosis; up to a maximum of 12 months) and post-diagnosis (diagnosis to treatment initiation; up to a maximum of 6 months). The study will be facilitated by a digital ecosystem consisting of the devices used for home-based assessments and a digital collaboration platform enabling communication between community and tertiary centres, and between clinicians and patients. PLANNED OUTCOMES: The primary endpoint will be time-adjusted semi-annual change in forced vital capacity (FVC; in millilitres) during the peri-diagnostic period. Physical functional capacity and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) will also be assessed. FVC and physical functional capacity will be measured using daily home spirometry and accelerometry, and at site visits using spirometry and the 6-min walk test. PROs will be assessed prior to, or during, site visits and will always be completed in the same order. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study may help to facilitate the early and accurate diagnosis of ILDs by increasing knowledge about disease progression, enabling collaboration between community and tertiary centres and improving communication between clinicians and patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03261037. FUNDING: F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd., Basel, Switzerland. Plain language summary available for this article.
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 | 0.023 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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".