Children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: are health outcomes better for those diagnosed younger?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children living with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) have swollen, painful and stiff joints, which may have an impact on all spheres of their life, as well as their family. While children diagnosed in their preschool years may be at risk for worse physical outcomes than children diagnosed later in life, it is not clear whether they have worse psychological outcomes and whether these outcomes have an impact on their everyday life. The aim of this study was to examine the association between age at diagnosis and health outcomes in families of children with JIA. METHODS: Parents of children with JIA (n = 182) who attended rheumatology clinics at the Montreal Children's Hospital and British Columbia Children's Hospital completed measures assessing socio-demographic attributes, their child's health status, health-related quality of life and pain level, as well as their own level of psychological distress and coping behaviours. Regression models explored the association between age at diagnosis and health outcomes while adjusting for sex, age, severity and duration of the disease. RESULTS: Parents of children diagnosed with JIA before 5 years of age found their child to have a better health-related quality of life in terms of psychosocial functioning than parents of children diagnosed later [β = -0.91 (-1.63, -0.19)]. Children diagnosed younger were also found to be less limited in schoolwork or activities with friends because of emotional or behavioural problems than children diagnosed later [odds ratio = 0.07 (0.01, 0.42)]. CONCLUSIONS: Children diagnosed younger seem to show good psychosocial adjustment, which may also be true for their caregivers. Perhaps more attention to psychosocial adjustment should be given to families of children who are diagnosed with the disease at an older age.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".