Diagnostic Utility of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Radiography in Juvenile Spondyloarthritis: Evaluation of the Sacroiliac Joints in Controls and Affected Subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the utility of radiography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the diagnosis of juvenile-onset spondyloarthritis in pediatric patients presenting with low back and/or sacroiliac (SI) pain of potentially inflammatory etiology. METHODS: Radiographs and MRI studies of the SI joints in 26 patients with juvenile spondyloarthritis (JSpA) and 35 controls were assessed independently by 2 radiologists, with discrepancies arbitrated by a third. Radiographs and MRI were blinded and read in separate batches in random order. RESULTS: Erosion was common and was the most useful diagnostic feature on radiography [positive likelihood ratio (LR) = 3.5] and was especially diagnostic of SpA on MRI (LR = 6.7). Subchondral sclerosis was common but was the least specific feature for both modalities. Joint space narrowing had some utility on radiography (LR = 2.0) and MRI (LR = 2.7) but was uncommon and had poor reader reliability. Bone marrow edema (LR = 3.1) and subarticular fat infiltration (LR = 4.5), detectable only on MRI, were both useful features. Global diagnostic impression of MRI (LR = 9.4) had very high utility for the diagnosis of JSpA, exceeding radiography (LR = 4.4) because of superior specificity. In addition, global diagnosis of SpA is much more reliably made on MRI (κ = 0.80) compared to radiography (κ = 0.30). CONCLUSION: Specificity and reliability of MRI of the SI joints are superior to radiography for the diagnosis of juvenile-onset SpA and, where available, MRI should replace radiography as the first line of investigation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".