MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4393033761 · doi:10.1183/13993003.01864-2023

Impact of obesity progression or regression on the longitudinal assessment of fibrosing interstitial lung disease

2024· letter· en· W4393033761 on OpenAlexaff
Hadeel Alqurashi, Mathieu Marillier, Igor Neder‐Serafini, Anne‐Catherine Bernard, Onofre Moran‐Mendoza, J. Alberto Neder

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInterstitial Lung Diseases and Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInterstitial lung diseaseHypoxemiaLungDownloadRestrictive lung diseaseIntensive care medicineObesityLung diseaseLung volumesCardiologyInternal medicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abnormalities in lung mechanics (restriction) and pulmonary gas exchange (hypoxemia) may jointly conspire to elicit exertional dyspnea and decrease exercise tolerance in patients with fibrosing interstitial lung diseases ( f -ILD) [1]. Obesity (body mass index (BMI)≥30 kg·m−2), a prevalent co-morbidity of f -ILD [2], may negatively impact on “static” ( e.g. , total lung capacity (TLC)) and dynamic (forced vital capacity (FVC)) lung volumes relevant to dyspnea genesis [3]. Footnotes This manuscript has recently been accepted for publication in the European Respiratory Journal . It is published here in its accepted form prior to copyediting and typesetting by our production team. After these production processes are complete and the authors have approved the resulting proofs, the article will move to the latest issue of the ERJ online. Please open or download the PDF to view this article. Conflict of Interest: All authors have nothing to disclose.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory Journal→Same topicInterstitial Lung Diseases and Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis→French-language works237,207→