MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319334358 · doi:10.1148/radiol.222557

Postacute COVID-19 Syndrome: <sup>129</sup>Xe MRI Ventilation Defects and Respiratory Outcomes 1 Year Later

2023· article· en· W4319334358 on OpenAlexafffund
H.K. Kooner, Marrissa J. McIntosh, Alexander M. Matheson, Mohammed Abdelrazek, Mitchell S. Albert, Inderdeep Dhaliwal, Miranda Kirby, Alexei Ouriadov, Giles Santyr, Carmen Venegas, Nisarg Radadia, Sarah Svenningsen, J. Michael Nicholson, Grace Párraga

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySt Joseph's Health CareUniversity of TorontoToronto Metropolitan UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonHospital for Sick ChildrenLakehead UniversityWestern University
FundersInstitute of Circulatory and Respiratory HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchReseau canadien de recherche respiratoireOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareCanadian Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Foundation
KeywordsMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakBetacoronavirusRespiratory systemCoronavirus InfectionsNuclear medicinePathologyInternal medicineOutbreakDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background In individuals with postacute COVID-19 syndrome (PACS) and normal pulmonary function, xenon 129 (129Xe) MRI ventilation defects, abnormal quality-of-life scores, and exercise limitation were reported 3 months after infection; the longitudinal trajectory remains unclear. Purpose To measure and compare pulmonary function, exercise capacity, quality of life, and 129Xe MRI ventilation defect percent (VDP) in individuals with PACS evaluated 3 and 15 months after COVID-19 infection. Materials and Methods In this prospective study, participants with PACS aged 18–80 years were enrolled between July 2020 and August 2021 from two quaternary care centers. 129Xe MRI VDP, diffusing capacity of lung for carbon monoxide (Dlco), spirometry, oscillometry, 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), and St George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) scores were evaluated 3 months and 15 months after COVID-19 infection. Differences between time points were evaluated using the paired t test. Multivariable models were generated to explain exercise capacity and quality-of-life improvement. Odds ratios (ORs) were used to evaluate potential treatment influences. Results Overall, 53 participants (mean age, 55 years ± 18 [SD]; 27 women) attended both 3- and 15-month visits and were included in the analysis. The mean values for 129Xe MRI VDP (5.8% and 4.2%; P = .003), forced expiratory volume in the 1st second of expiration percent predicted (84% and 90%; P = .001), Dlco percent predicted (86% and 99%; P = .002), and SGRQ score (35 and 25; P < .001) improved between the 3- and 15-month visit. VDP measured 3 months after COVID-19 infection predicted the change in 6MWD (β = −0.643, P = .006), while treatment with respiratory medication at 3 months predicted an improved quality-of-life score at 15 months (OR, 4.0; 95% CI: 1.2, 13.8; P = .03). Conclusion Pulmonary function, gas exchange, exercise capacity, quality of life, and 129Xe MRI ventilation defect percent (VDP) improved in participants with postacute COVID-19 syndrome at 15 months compared with 3 months after infection. VDP measured at 3 months after infection correlated with improved exercise capacity, while treatment with respiratory medication was associated with an improved quality-of-life score 15 months after infection. ClinicalTrials.gov registration no. NCT05014516 © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Vogel-Claussen in this issue.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations30
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiologySame topicAtomic and Subatomic Physics ResearchFrench-language works237,207