The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of computed density and macroscopic morphometry in pulmonary emphysema.
Abstract
High-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) scans were obtained at 1 cm intervals in 63 subjects referred for surgical resection of a cancer or for transplantation to find out whether the relative area of lung occupied by attenuation values lower than a threshold would be a measurement of macroscopic emphysema. Using a semiautomatic procedure, the relative areas occupied by attenuation values lower than eight thresholds ranging from -900 to -970 HU were calculated on the set of scans obtained through the lobe or the lung to be resected. The extent of emphysema was quantified by a computer-assisted method on horizontal paper-mounted lung sections obtained every 1 to 2 cm. The only level for which no statistically significant difference was found between the HRCT and the morphometric data was -950 HU. To determine the number of scans sufficient for an accurate quantification, we recalculated the relative area occupied by attenuation values lower than -950 HU on progressively fewer numbers of scans and investigated the departure from the results obtained with 1 cm intervals. Because of wide variations in this departure from patient to patient, a standard cannot be recommended as the optimal distance between scans.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965
Cited by
Computed Tomographic Measurements of Airway Dimensions and Emphysema in Smokers
NAKANO, Y., MURO, S., SAKAI, H., HIRAI, T., CHIN, K., TSUKINO, M., NISHIMURA, K., ITOH, H., PARÉ, P. D., HOGG, J. C., et al. (2000) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/ajrccm.162.3.9907120 · Cited by 695
Wang, M., Aaron, C. P., Madrigano, J., Hoffman, E. A., Angelini, E., Yang, J., Laine, A., Vetterli, T. M., Kinney, P. L., Sampson, P. D., et al. (2019) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2019.10255 · Cited by 389
Effects of cannabis on pulmonary structure, function and symptoms
Aldington, S., Williams, M., Nowitz, M., Weatherall, M., Pritchard, A., McNaughton, A., Robinson, G., & Beasley, R. (2007) · Thorax · doi:10.1136/thx.2006.077081 · Cited by 316
Computed tomographic imaging of the airways: relationship to structure and function
de Jong, P. A., Müller, N. L., Paré, P. D., & Coxson, H. O. (2005) · European Respiratory Journal · doi:10.1183/09031936.05.00007105 · Cited by 171
Diffusing Capacity of Carbon Monoxide in Assessment of COPD
Balasubramanian, A., MacIntyre, N. R., Henderson, R. J., Jensen, R. L., Kinney, G., Stringer, W. W., Hersh, C. P., Bowler, R. P., Casaburi, R., Han, M. K., et al. (2019) · Chest · doi:10.1016/j.chest.2019.06.035 · Cited by 100
Metadata
- Authors
- Gevenois, P. A., de Maertelaer, V, De Vuyst, P., Zanen, J., & Yernault, J. C.
- Venue
- American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1995-08
- Volume
- 152
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 653-657
- ISSN
- 1073-449X (ISSN-L)
- 1535-4970
- OpenAlex
- W2117489289
- Cited by
- 882
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 4.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of computed density and macroscopic morphometry in pulmonary emphysema. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1164/ajrccm.152.2.7633722
- The paper
- Gevenois, P. A., de Maertelaer, V, De Vuyst, P., Zanen, J., & Yernault, J. C. (1995). Comparison of computed density and macroscopic morphometry in pulmonary emphysema. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm.152.2.7633722
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
