Protocols for the initial treatment of moderately severe juvenile dermatomyositis: Results of a Children's Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Consensus Conference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To use juvenile dermatomyositis (DM) survey data and expert opinion to develop a small number of consensus treatment protocols, which reflect current initial treatment of moderately severe juvenile DM. METHODS: A consensus meeting was held in Toronto, Ontario, Canada on December 1-2, 2007. Nominal group technique was used to achieve consensus on treatment protocols, which represented typical management of moderately severe juvenile DM. Consensus was also reached as to which patients these protocols would be applicable (inclusion and exclusion criteria), which initial investigations should be done prior to initiating one of these protocols, which data should be collected to evaluate these protocols, and the concomitant interventions required or recommended. RESULTS: Three protocols that described the first 2 months of treatment were developed. All protocols included corticosteroids and methotrexate. One protocol also included intravenous gamma globulin. Consensus was achieved for all issues that were addressed by conference participants, although there were some areas of controversy. CONCLUSION: Despite considerable variation in clinical practice, it is possible to achieve consensus on the initial treatment of juvenile DM. Once these protocols are extended beyond 2 months, these protocols will be available for clinical use. By using methods that account for differences between patients (confounding by indication), the comparative effectiveness of the protocols will be evaluated. In the future, the goal will be to identify the optimal treatment of moderately severe juvenile DM.
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 | 0.326 | 0.248 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".