The utility of dynamic chest radiography in patients with asthma, COPD, COVID-19 and ILD: A pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction and Objectives Assessment of breathlessness requires a combination of imaging and lung function testing. Dynamic digital radiography (DDR) of the thorax is an imaging technique that allows physiological and anatomical information to be gathered at the time of chest X-ray and has the potential to significantly streamline diagnostic pathways. The aims of this study were to investigate the acceptability of DDR to patients and explore the correlation between DDR-derived measurements with lung volumes measured using full pulmonary function tests (PFT).Materials and Methods We conducted a single-centre, prospective, pilot study of patients with confirmed asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), interstitial lung disease (ILD) or post-COVID-19 infection. Participants underwent DDR and paired PFT between March 2021 and August 2022. Dynamic digital radiography acceptability was measured using a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS). Point estimates and exact confidence intervals were used to evaluate participant preference. Digital dynamic radiography would be considered acceptable if the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval (exact) is greater than 50%. Pearson correlation (r) was used to explore associations between DDR measurements and PFT parameters.Results 40 participants (asthma, n = 11; COPD, n = 9; ILD, n = 11; post-COVID, n = 9) had DDR with adequate image acquisition and PFT. Mean age of participants was 63.38 years (standard deviation 14.89) and 63% were male (25/40). The lower 95% confidence interval threshold for VAS acceptability was 92% for all groups combined and considered acceptable. The projected lung area at end inspiration (PLAinsp) closely correlated with total lung capacity across all disease cohorts (r = 0.80, p < 0.001) and projected lung area at end expiration (PLAexp) was strongly correlated with residual volume in airways disease (COPD: r = 0.87, p = 0.003; asthma: r = 0.85, p = 0.002).Conclusion Dynamic digital radiography is an acceptable investigation for respiratory patients. DDR-derived measurements correlate with lung volumes obtained from PFTs. Larger studies are required to validate DDR as a possible method to identify and monitor air trapping in airways disease, allowing early detection and assessment of treatment effectiveness.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".