MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reactance and elastance as measures of small airways response to bronchodilator in asthma

2019· article· en· W2982145478 on OpenAlexafffund
Swati A. Bhatawadekar, Del Leary, V. Lange, Ubong Peters, Scott Fulton, Paul Hernandez, Colm McParland, Geoffrey N. Maksym

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAsthma and respiratory diseases
Canadian institutionsQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAtlantic Canada Opportunities AgencyCanadian Thoracic Society
KeywordsBronchodilationAsthmaMedicineBronchodilatorSpirometryAirwayBronchoconstrictionAirway resistanceSmall airwaysCardiologyRespiratory systemRespiratory physiologyAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bronchodilation alters both respiratory system resistance (Rrs) and reactance (Xrs) in asthma, but how changes in Rrs and Xrs compare, and respond differently in health and asthma, in reflecting the contributions from the large and small airways has not been assessed. We assessed reversibility using spirometry and oscillometry in healthy and asthma subjects. Using a multibranch airway-tree model with the mechanics of upper airway shunt, we compared the effects of airway dilation and small airways recruitment to explain the changes in Rrs and Xrs. Bronchodilator decreased Rrs by 23.0 (19.0)% in 18 asthma subjects and by 13.5 (19.5)% in 18 healthy subjects. Estimated respiratory system elastance (Ers) decreased by 23.2 (21.4)% in asthma, with no significant decrease in healthy subjects. With the use of the model, airway recruitment of 15% across a generation of the small airways could explain the changes in Ers in asthma with no recruitment in healthy subjects. In asthma, recruitment accounted for 40% of the changes in Rrs, with the remaining explained by airway dilation of 6.8% attributable largely to the central airways. Interestingly, the same dilation magnitude explained the changes in Rrs in healthy subjects. Shunt only affected Rrs of the model. Ers was unaltered in health and unaffected by shunt in both groups. In asthma, Ers changed comparably to Rrs and could be attributed to small airways, while the change in Rrs was split between large and small airways. This implies that in asthma Ers sensed through Xrs may be a more effective measure of small airways obstruction and recruitment than Rrs. NEW & NOTEWORTHY This is the first study to quantify to relative contributions of small and large airways to bronchodilator response in healthy subjects and patients with asthma. The response of the central airways to bronchodilator was similar in magnitude in both study groups, whereas the response of the small airways was significant among patients with asthma. These results suggest that low-frequency reactance and derived elastance are both sensitive measures of small airway function in asthma.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations25
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicAsthma and respiratory diseasesFrench-language works237,207