MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4206457351 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2021.808770

Ultrasound-Derived Diaphragm Contractile Reserve as a Marker of Clinical Status in Patients With Cystic Fibrosis

2022· article· en· W4206457351 on OpenAlexafffund
Fanny Gabrysz‐Forget, Anne-Catherine Maynard-Paquette, Aileen Kharat, François Tremblay, M. Silviet-Carricart, Annick Lavoie, Martin Girard, Bruno‐Pierre Dubé

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeContractilityCardiologyInternal medicineIsometric exerciseDiaphragm (acoustics)UltrasoundRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: In patients with cystic fibrosis (CF), the monitoring of respiratory muscle activity using electromyography can provide information on the demand-to-capacity ratio of the respiratory system and act as a clinical marker of disease activity, but this technique is not adapted to routine clinical care. Ultrasonography of the diaphragm could provide an alternative, simpler and more widely available alternative allowing the real-time assessment of the diaphragm contractile reserve (DCR), but its relationship with recognized markers of disease severity and clinical outcomes are currently unknown. Methods: Stable patients with CF were prospectively recruited. Diaphragm ultrasound was performed and compared to forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), residual volume (RV), handgrip strength, fat-free mass index (FFMI), serum vitamin levels, dyspnea levels and rate of acute exacerbation (AE). Diaphragm activity was reported as DCR (the ratio of tidal-to-maximal thickening fractions, representing the remaining diaphragm contractility available after tidal inspiration) and TFmax (representing maximal diaphragm contractile strength). Inter-observer reliability of the measurement of DCR was evaluated using intra-class correlation analysis. Results: 110 patients were included [61 males, median (interquartile range), age 31 (27–38) years, FEV1 66 (46–82)% predicted]. DCR was significantly correlated to FEV1 (rho = 0.46, p < 0.001), RV (rho = −0.46, p < 0.001), FFMI (rho = 0.41, p < 0.001), and handgrip strength (rho = 0.22, p = 0.02), but TFmax was not. In a multiple linear regression analysis, both RV and FFMI were independent predictors of DCR. DCR, but not TFmax, was statistically lower in patients with > 2 exacerbations/year (56 ± 25 vs. 71 ± 17%, p = 0.001) and significantly lower with higher dyspnea levels. A ROC analysis showed that DCR performed better than FEV1 (mean difference in AUROC 0.09, p = 0.04), RV (mean difference in AUROC 0.11, p = 0.03), and TFmax at identifying patients with an mMRC score > 2. Inter-observer reliability of DCR was high (ICC = 0.89, 95% CI 0.84–0.92, p < 0.001). Conclusion: In patients with CF, DCR is a reliable and non-invasive marker of disease severity that is related to respiratory and extra-pulmonary manifestations of the disease and to clinical outcomes. Future studies investigating the use of DCR as a longitudinal marker of disease progression, response to interventions or target for therapy would further validate its translation into clinical practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Physiology→Same topicCystic Fibrosis Research Advances→French-language works237,207→