MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2921797511 · doi:10.1164/rccm.201810-1912ed

Can a Physiologic Insight “Resuscitate” Research in Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation?

2018· letter· en· W2921797511 on OpenAlexafffund
Damon C. Scales, Brian P. Kavanagh

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2018
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenHealth Sciences CentreMuscular Dystrophy CanadaUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMedicineCardiopulmonary resuscitationResuscitationDo not resuscitateIntensive care medicineResuscitation OrdersAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

genetic and environmental factors that affect gene regulation affect disease risk, remains a major challenge.The discovery that a regulatory variant affecting MUC5B expression in distal airways is associated with a very large increase in risk of developing pulmonary fibrosis is a compelling early step toward this goal (12).It will also be critical to identify disease-associated changes in mucin gene expression in different regions of the lung and to understand how these affect mucus function.Recent studies show that differences in mucus composition are associated with dramatic differences in mucus organization and function.For example, MUC5B and MUC5AC are found within distinct domains of mucus plugs in fatal asthma, and the MUC5AC-rich domains play a unique role in mucostasis by tethering to the epithelium (13).In pigs, MUC5B from submucosal gland ducts formed strands composed of multiple MUC5B filaments, whereas MUC5AC emerged from superficial secretory cells as wispy threads or sheets, and it seems likely that these distinct structures contribute differently to mucociliary transport ( 14).Understanding how regional and disease-associated differences in mucins and other mucus components affect host defense and lung function is likely to be a long but rewarding journey.Okuda and colleagues have provided a map that will help us find our way.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.009
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0320.046
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.007

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine→Same topicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation→French-language works237,207→