Advances in COPD imaging using CT and MRI: linkage with lung physiology and clinical outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent years have witnessed major advances in lung imaging in patients with COPD. These include significant refinements in images obtained by computed tomography (CT) scans together with the introduction of new techniques and software that aim for obtaining the best image whilst using the lowest possible radiation dose. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has also emerged as a useful radiation-free tool in assessing structural and more importantly functional derangements in patients with well-established COPD and smokers without COPD, even before the existence of overt changes in resting physiological lung function tests. Together, CT and MRI now allow objective quantification and assessment of structural changes within the airways, lung parenchyma and pulmonary vessels. Furthermore, CT and MRI can now provide objective assessments of regional lung ventilation and perfusion, and multinuclear MRI provides further insight into gas exchange; this can help in structured decisions regarding treatment plans. These advances in chest imaging techniques have brought new insights into our understanding of disease pathophysiology and characterising different disease phenotypes. The present review discusses, in detail, the advances in lung imaging in patients with COPD and how structural and functional imaging are linked with common resting physiological tests and important clinical outcomes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".