Characterizing Pediatric Lung Ultrasound Findings During a Chemically-induced Bronchospasm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Lung ultrasound (LUS) has been shown to be a useful clinical tool in pediatrics. LUS has been well studied in other respiratory conditions, but very little is known about the LUS findings of asthma. Objectives: The primary objective was to characterize LUS findings of pediatric patients before and after a chemically-induced bronchospasm. The secondary objective was to evaluate the effect of bronchodilators on the LUS findings. Methods: Eligible patients 6 to 17 years old presenting for a methacholine challenge test (MCT) in a pediatric respiratory clinic were recruited. LUS was performed before and after the MCT as well as after bronchodilator administration. LUS were analysed by an expert blinded to the patient characteristics and MCT results. Results: 44 patients were included in the study. 5 patients had positive LUS findings at baseline. 15 patients had a positive LUS following the MCT. There was a significant association between having a chemically-induced bronchospasm and a positive LUS post-MCT (p=0.05, odds ratio 5.3, 95% CI [1.0-27.7]) . Among patients who developed positive LUS findings post-MCT, 4 out of 9 returned to having a negative LUS post-bronchodilator administration. Conclusions: This is the first known report of an association between LUS findings and bronchospasm in pediatric patients. It is also the first documentation of resolution of LUS findings post-bronchodilator administration. Most LUS findings observed were small and limited to one or a few intercostal spaces. Further research is required to evaluate the effect of bronchodilators on LUS in the emergency department.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".