European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society technical statement: standardisation of the measurement of lung volumes, 2023 update
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This document updates the 2005 European Respiratory Society (ERS) and American Thoracic Society (ATS) technical standard for the measurement of lung volumes. The 2005 document integrated the recommendations of an ATS/ERS task force with those from an earlier National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute workshop that led to the publication of background papers between 1995 and 1999 and a consensus workshop report with more in-depth descriptions and discussion. Advancements in hardware and software, new research and emerging approaches have necessitated an update to the 2005 technical standard to guide laboratory directors, physiologists, operators, pulmonologists and manufacturers. Key updates include standardisation of linked spirometry, new equipment quality control and validation recommendations, generalisation of the multiple breath washout concept beyond nitrogen, a new acceptability and grading system with addition of example tracings, and a brief review of imaging and other new techniques to measure lung volumes. Future directions and key research questions are also noted.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".