MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403064496 · doi:10.1038/s41746-024-01260-z

Improving prognostic accuracy in lung transplantation using unique features of isolated human lung radiographs

2024· article· en· W4403064496 on OpenAlexafffund
B.T. Chao, Andrew T. Sage, Micheal McInnis, Jun Ma, Micah Grubert Van Iderstine, Xuanzi Zhou, Jerome Valero, Marcelo Cypel, Mingyao Liu, Bo Wang, Shaf Keshavjee

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Digital Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsVector InstituteToronto General HospitalToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network FoundationUniversity Health Network
KeywordsLungLung transplantationRadiographyMedicineHuman lungTransplantationRadiologyPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) enables advanced assessment of human lungs for transplant suitability. We developed a convolutional neural network (CNN)-based approach to analyze the largest cohort of isolated lung radiographs to date. CNNs were trained to process 1300 longitudinal radiographs from n = 650 clinical EVLP cases. Latent features were transformed into principal components (PC) and correlated with known radiographic findings. PCs were combined with physiological data to classify clinical outcomes: (1) recipient time to extubation of <72 h, (2) ≥ 72 h, and (3) lungs unsuitable for transplantation. The top PC was significantly correlated with infiltration (Spearman R: 0·72, p < 0·0001), and adding radiographic PCs significantly improved the discrimination for clinical outcomes (Accuracy: 73 vs 78%, p = 0·014). CNN-derived radiographic lung features therefore add substantial value to the current assessments. This approach can be adopted by EVLP centers worldwide to harness radiographic information without requiring real-time radiological expertise.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.442
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.348
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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Digital MedicineSame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207