Computed Tomography Imaging Vessels, Airways and Emphysema: Association With Airflow Limitation in COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parenchyma, airways and vessels are different compartments of the lung affected by chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The impact of COPD on the parenchyma, known as emphysema, is characterized by tissue destruction, whereas disease in the airways and vessels manifests itself in terms of inflammation, structural remodelling/pruning. Emphysema has been shown to be associated with pruning of both airways and vessels and conventional measures of vascular remodelling may not be a sensitive measure of pruning/vessel loss because of proximal pruning of vessels resulting in their distal dilation. Therefore, this work focusses on development of a novel measurement of vascular loss, investigates the association between airway and vessel remodeling/loss and highlights relative contributions of different disease features towards airflow limitation in COPD. A significant association was found between measurements of airway and vascular pruning with our developed vascular measurement showing strongest association with airway measure, compared to the conventional measures of vascular loss, thus adding to its validity. Vascular alterations, airway remodelling and emphysematous destruction showed strongest relative association with airflow limitation in people who are at risk of developing COPD, mild COPD and moderate-severe COPD, respectively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".