MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Clinical Predictors Of Expanded Disability Status Scale Rank Change Over 5-Year Intervals In The MSBase Registry (P4.187)

2014· article· en· W1577289485 on OpenAlexaff
Stella Hughes, Timothy Spelman, María Trojano, Alessandra Lugaresi, Guillermo Izquierdo, François Grand’Maison, Pierre Duquette, Marc Girard, Pierre Grammond, Celia Oreja‐Guevara, Raymond Hupperts, Cavit Boz, Roberto Bergamaschi, Giorgio Giuliani, E. Lalinde Del Rio, Jeannette Lechner‐Scott, Vincent Van Pesch, Gerardo Iuliano, Marcela Fiol, Freek Verheul, Michael Barnett, Mark Slee, Joseph Herbert, Ilya Kister, Norbert Vella, Fraser Moore, Tatjana Petkovska‐Boskova, Vahid Shaygannejad, Vilija Jokubaitis, Gavin McDonnell, Stanley Hawkins, Frank Kee, Helmut Butzkueven, Orla Gray

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsCégep de LévisRobarts Clinical TrialsHôpital Notre-Dame
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtArt historyHumanitiesCartographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine clinical predictors of Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) rank change over 5-year intervals as potential markers of multiple sclerosis (MS) severity, using an international cohort in the MSBase Registry. BACKGROUND: Given clinical heterogeneity in MS, it is desirable to define predictors of later outcomes. Using the MSBase Registry, we previously showed that EDSS ranking allows prediction of 5-year disability outcome. METHODS: Two MSBase Registry cohorts, in which EDSS rank change was previously described, were analysed. We included patients with relapsing remitting MS (RRMS) with 5-year prospectively acquired EDSS data. Intervals were years 1-6 (‘early RRMS’) and years 5-10 (‘later RRMS’) after CIS. As change in EDSS rank was statistically skewed, quantile (median) regression was performed to assess predictors of rank change over the 5-year intervals. Predictors included age, sex and imaging findings with stratification by EDSS, disease-modifying treatment (DMT) and annualised relapse rate (ARR). RESULTS: In the ‘early RRMS’ group, age and ARR ‘on treatment’ predicted EDSS rank worsening, whereas DMT possession ratio (over 50% during interval) predicted rank improvement. In the ‘later RRMS’ group, ARR ‘on treatment’ also predicted rank change but ARR ‘off treatment’ and DMT possession ratio (>50%) had no effect. Male sex and infratentorial MRI lesions were also predictive of worse outcome in the ‘later RRMS’ group. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study evaluating predictors of EDSS rank change over 5-year intervals. The positive impact of treatment was observed in the early (but not the later) cohort in this study, supporting the case for early treatment in MS. The study confirms the relevance of on-treatment relapses for worse disability outcomes. Study Support: The MSBase Registry is supported by the independent MSBase Foundation Ltd which receives financial support from Merck Serono, Biogen Idec, Novartis, Bayer Schering and Sanofi Aventis.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurology→Same topicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies→French-language works237,207→