MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285048651 · doi:10.1038/s43856-022-00149-w

Making cough count in tuberculosis care

2022· review· en· W4285048651 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Medicine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory and Cough-Related Research
Canadian institutionsCegep Edouard MontpetitCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalMcGill University
FundersIndian Institute of Science
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicineTuberculosisDiseaseEpidemiologyChronic coughHealth carePathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cough assessment is central to the clinical management of respiratory diseases, including tuberculosis (TB), but strategies to objectively and unobtrusively measure cough are lacking. Acoustic epidemiology is an emerging field that uses technology to detect cough sounds and analyze cough patterns to improve health outcomes among people with respiratory conditions linked to cough. This field is increasingly exploring the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) for more advanced applications, such as analyzing cough sounds as a biomarker for disease screening. While much of the data are preliminary, objective cough assessment could potentially transform disease control programs, including TB, and support individual patient management. Here, we present an overview of recent advances in this field and describe how cough assessment, if validated, could support public health programs at various stages of the TB care cascade.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.393
GPT teacher head0.516
Teacher spread0.123 · 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