MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383745698 · doi:10.1055/s-0043-1770058

Respiratory System Dynamics

2023· article· en· W4383745698 on OpenAlexaff
David A. Kaminsky, Donald W. Cockcroft, Beth E. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAirflowExpirationRespiratory physiologyLung volumesDynamic hyperinflationAirway resistanceWork of breathingBreathingTidal volumeBronchodilatorRespiratory systemLungTranspulmonary pressureMechanicsAnesthesiaInternal medicineAsthmaMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While static mechanical forces govern resting lung volumes, dynamic forces determine tidal breathing, airflow, and changes in airflow and lung volume during normal and abnormal breathing. This section will examine the mechanisms, measurement methodology, and interpretation of the dynamic changes in airflow and lung volume that occur in health and disease. We will first examine how the total work of breathing can be described by the parameters of the equation of motion, which determine the pressure required to move air into and out of the lung. This will include a detailed description of airflow characteristics and airway resistance. Next, we will review the changes in pressure and flow that determine maximal forced inspiration and expiration, which result in the maximal flow-volume loop and the clinically important forced expired volume in 1 second. We will also assess the mechanisms and interpretation of bronchodilator responsiveness, dynamic hyperinflation, and airways hyperresponsiveness.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.009

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207