MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3039487931 · doi:10.1042/cs20200382

Macrophages—the immune effector guardians of the lung: impact of corticosteroids on their functional responses

2020· letter· en· W3039487931 on OpenAlexafffund
Stephan F. van Eeden, Kentaro Akata

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Science · 2020
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCOPDImmune systemImmunologyMedicineInflammationEffectorLungPneumoniaPathogenesisDiseasePathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lung macrophages (LMs) are key immune effector cells that protect the lung from inhaled particulate matter, noxious gases and pathogens. In Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), there is an abundance of macrophages in airspaces and lung tissues suggesting that they play an important role in the pathogenesis of the disease. Furthermore, macrophage phenotype and functional properties are altered in COPD toward a more pro-inflammatory state, characterized by reduced pathogen recognition and processing ability and dysfunctional tissue repair qualities. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), used in the management of COPD, has been shown to reduce acute exacerbations of COPD but is also associated with increased occurrence of pneumonia. Corticosteroids treatment altered LM phenotypic characteristics and their functional properties, and this commentary discusses current knowledge and also the gaps in our understanding of the impact of ICS on LMs phenotype and function. A better understanding of how ICSs impact the immune-inflammatory responses in the lung, in particular ICSs' effects on LMs, could allow more selective personalized tailoring of the use of ICSs in COPD to improve disease progression, morbidity and mortality.

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)0.014
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0210.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.004

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical ScienceSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207