Expert Agreement on EULAR/EUSTAR Recommendations for the Management of Systemic Sclerosis: Table 1.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The European League Against Rheumatism/EULAR Scleroderma Trials and Research group (EULAR/EUSTAR) has published recommendations for the management of systemic sclerosis (SSc). Members of the Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium and the Canadian Scleroderma Research Group were surveyed regarding their level of agreement with the recommendations. METHODS: A survey containing the 14 EULAR/EUSTAR recommendations asked participants to indicate their level of agreement with each on a 10-point scale, from 0 (not at all) to 9 (completely agree). The survey was sent to 117 people, and 66 replies were received (56% response rate). RESULTS: Exceptions to generally high agreement included the use of iloprost and bosentan for digital vasculopathy, methotrexate for skin involvement, and bosentan and epoprostenol for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH; all < 69% agreement, defined as ≥ 7 rating). Vasculopathy and PAH treatment had differences in agreement between North America and Europe (p < 0.006). Respondents who were EULAR/EUSTAR recommendation authors shared a similar level of agreement compared to those who were not, except for the use of proton pump inhibitors for the prevention of SSc-related gastroesophageal reflux disease, esophageal ulcers, and strictures. CONCLUSION: EULAR/EUSTAR recommendations were relatively well accepted among SSc experts. Overall reduced agreement may be due to the modest efficacy of some agents (such as methotrexate for the skin). Some regional disagreement is likely because of access differences.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".