MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1843079338

Patients with scleroderma may have increased risk of osteoporosis. A comparison to rheumatoid arthritis and noninflammatory musculoskeletal conditions.

2008· article· en· W1843079338 on OpenAlexaff
Sai Yan Yuen, Bram Rochwerg, Janine Ouimet, Janet Pope

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Sclerosis and Related Diseases
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRheumatoid arthritisInternal medicineOsteoporosisRheumatologyScleroderma (fungus)Bone mineralConnective tissue diseaseDemographicsRheumatoid factorRisk factorGastroenterologyPhysical therapyDiseaseAutoimmune diseasePathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate if subjects with scleroderma (systemic sclerosis, SSc) have increased risk for developing osteoporosis (OP). METHODS: A survey assessing demographics, diagnosis/investigations for OP, and risk factors for OP was mailed to 129 patients with SSc, 158 controls with noninflammatory musculoskeletal (MSK) disease, and 230 positive controls with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). All available charts were reviewed and results were included in analyses of demographics, OP status, past bone mineral density (BMD), and past steroid use. In addition, we recorded BMD results (T score) of SSc patients with their matched RA controls. Analyses adjusted for age were done for SSc versus MSK and SSc versus RA. RESULTS: The response rate was 61% for patients with SSc (n = 28 diffuse, 51 limited disease), RA 67%, and MSK 59%; however, through chart review, 159 SSc, 140 MSK, and 235 RA patients were included in the analyses. Mean age and proportion of women did not differ between groups. Disease duration was longer in RA versus SSc group (16.5 vs 11.5 yrs; p < 0.0001). The prevalence of OP in SSc was similar to RA controls (19.4% vs 16.7%; p = 0.38) but likely higher than MSK controls (12.2%; p = 0.054). Subjects with SSc reported a higher rate of disability (41.0% vs 15.6%; p = 0.0001) and less family history of OP (22.8% vs 46.7%; p = 0.0006) compared with the MSK control group. There were no differences between groups in reports of fracture (35% SSc, 43% MSK, 37% RA; p = 0.5) or OP related fractures (4% SSc, 11% MSK, 11% RA; p = 0.5). Subjects with SSc were less likely to have had a BMD done in the past compared to RA (40.9% vs 62.6%; p = 0.0001). Subjects with RA who reported OP had longer disease duration than RA without OP (18 +/- 1.7 yrs vs 12 +/- 0.8; p = 0.0009). Results from the chart review showed that the T scores of SSc (n = 56, mean age 62.9 +/- SD 10.1 yrs) at lumbar spine (SSc -1.01 vs RA -0.97), femoral neck (SSc -2.07 vs RA -1.46; p = 0.01, adjusting for age p = 0.26), and total hip region (SSc -1.52 vs RA -1.25) were comparable to or even lower than the RA group (n = 56, mean age 62.2 +/- SD 10.7 yrs). CONCLUSION: The prevalence of OP in patients with SSc was comparable to those with RA, but higher than in the MSK group. Age was found to be an important factor, as expected. Also, our results indicated that BMD (T score) in SSc was similar to or even lower than in patients with RA. Increasing the awareness to order BMD measurements in patients with SSc may be warranted based on our results, especially for older patients.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations44
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicSystemic Sclerosis and Related DiseasesFrench-language works237,207