Repeat bronchoalveolar lavage in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: proceed with caution?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a chronic, progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease with a median life expectancy of 3–5 years [1]. In recent years, management of IPF has been transformed with the worldwide approval of two anti-fibrotic therapies. In parallel, advances in the understanding of IPF pathogenesis have identified numerous targets for potential therapeutic intervention [2]. However, the adoption of anti-fibrotic therapies as the standard of care for patients with IPF has further increased the complexity of investigating novel therapeutics in clinical trials. New, innovative clinical trial design approaches are therefore being implemented. This includes early-phase trials designed not only to inform about drug dosing, safety and tolerability, but also to provide sufficient confidence on target engagement or potential efficacy to support progression to the much more costly later-phase studies. Careful deliberation is required when considering repeat bronchoalveolar lavage in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis
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 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.026 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.011 |
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".