Bronchoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic: A Canadian Thoracic Society position statement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This position statement aims to provide rapid guidance for those performing bronchoscopy in the pediatric and adult populations during the COVID-19 pandemic. These recommendations are based on the consensus of the authors, who are members of the Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) Chest Procedures Assembly, and on the information available at the time this document was written, including guidance from other organizations. Changes in our understanding of COVID-19 and the course of the pandemic may affect the recommendations in this statement. Guidance from local public health authorities and from institutional infection prevention and control departments should be considered when assessing information in this document. Readers should consult these resources as they adapt plans for bronchoscopy during the pandemic. We plan to update this guidance regularly as new information becomes available, and recommend periodically checking the Canadian Thoracic Society website (https://cts-sct.ca/covid-19/) for updates.
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 | 0.025 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.025 | 0.038 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.008 |
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".