Radiographic features in investigated for Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia: a nested case-control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) can be challenging to diagnose, often requiring bronchoscopy. Since most patients suspected of PJP undergo imaging, we hypothesized that the findings of these studies could help estimate the probability of disease prior to invasive testing. METHODS: We created a cohort of patients who underwent bronchoscopy specifically to diagnose PJP and conducted a nested case-control study to compare the radiographic features between patients with (n = 72) and without (n = 288) pathologically proven PJP. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify radiographic features independently associated with PJP. RESULTS: Chest x-ray findings poorly predicted the diagnosis of PJP. However, multivariable analysis of CT scan findings found that "increased interstitial markings" (OR 4.3; 95%CI 2.2-8.2), "ground glass opacities" (OR 3.3; 95%CI 1.2-9.1) and the radiologist's impression of PJP being "possible" (OR 2.0; 95%CI 1.0-4.1) or "likely" (OR 9.3; 95%CI 3.4-25.3) were independently associated with the final diagnosis (c-statistic 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: Where there is clinical suspicion of PJP, the use of CT scan can help determine the probability of PJP. Identifying patients at low risk of PJP may enable better use of non-invasive testing to avoid bronchoscopy while higher probability patients could be prioritized.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".