MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399672301 · doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2024.02.026

The 2023 American Association for Thoracic Surgery (AATS) Expert Consensus Document: Management of subsolid lung nodules

2024· review· en· W4399672301 on OpenAlexaff
Haiquan Chen, Anthony W. Kim, Michael K.Y. Hsin, Joseph B. Shrager, Ashley E. Prosper, Momen M. Wahidi, Dennis A. Wigle, Carol C. Wu, James Huang, Kazuhiro Yasufuku, Claudia I. Henschke, Kenji Suzuki, Tina D. Tailor, David R. Jones, Jane Yanagawa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMultidisciplinary approachCardiothoracic surgeryDelphi methodNodule (geology)PulmonologistsAppropriate Use CriteriaMEDLINERadiologyGeneral surgerySurgeryIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Lung cancers that present as radiographic subsolid nodules represent a subtype with distinct biological behavior and outcomes. The objective of this document is to review the existing literature and report consensus among a group of multidisciplinary experts, providing specific recommendations for the clinical management of subsolid nodules. METHODS: The American Association for Thoracic Surgery Clinical Practice Standards Committee assembled an international, multidisciplinary expert panel composed of radiologists, pulmonologists, and thoracic surgeons with established expertise in the management of subsolid nodules. A focused literature review was performed with the assistance of a medical librarian. Expert consensus statements were developed with class of recommendation and level of evidence for each of 4 main topics: (1) definitions of subsolid nodules (radiology and pathology), (2) surveillance and diagnosis, (3) surgical interventions, and (4) management of multiple subsolid nodules. Using a modified Delphi method, the statements were evaluated and refined by the entire panel. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 17 recommendations. These consensus statements reflect updated insights on subsolid nodule management based on the latest literature and current clinical experience, focusing on the correlation between radiologic findings and pathological classifications, individualized subsolid nodule surveillance and surgical strategies, and multimodality therapies for multiple subsolid lung nodules. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the complex nature of the decision-making process in the management of subsolid nodules, consensus on several key recommendations was achieved by this American Association for Thoracic Surgery expert panel. These recommendations, based on evidence and a modified Delphi method, provide guidance for thoracic surgeons and other medical professionals who care for patients with subsolid nodules.

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)0.070
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.088
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0700.088
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0090.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0100.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.006

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations49
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular SurgerySame topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207