Oxygen for interstitial lung diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Supplemental oxygen therapy is prescribed for management of hypoxaemia in patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD). This review summarizes current evidence and implications of the use of supplemental oxygen therapy at home and during exercise training in ILD. RECENT FINDINGS: Despite the significance of hypoxaemia in patients with ILD, there is a lack of high-quality evidence to guide the use of oxygen therapy in this population. Recent studies suggest that ambulatory oxygen may improve symptoms and health-related quality of life in patients with ILD. Long-term oxygen therapy for resting hypoxaemia in ILD is recommended by international guidelines. Supplemental oxygen during exercise may augment training effects, whereas therapeutic effects of nocturnal oxygen therapy are yet to be evaluated in patients with ILD. Nevertheless, it is important to consider the potential burden imposed by oxygen therapy on patients' daily activities of living. SUMMARY: Ambulatory oxygen may be considered in ILD patients with exertional hypoxaemia, with long-term oxygen therapy being a standard care for resting hypoxaemia. Trials are currently underway to clarify therapeutic potentials of supplemental oxygen for exertional hypoxaemia and during exercise training in ILD patients, with additional research needed for the evaluation of nocturnal oxygen therapy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.005 |
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".