Development and Assessment of Users’ Satisfaction with the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 Responder Index-50 Website
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the development of the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 Responder Index-50 (S2K RI-50) Website (www.s2k-ri-50.com) and to assess satisfaction with its training and examination modules among rheumatologists and rheumatology fellows. METHODS: The development of the Website occurred in 3 phases. The first was a deployment phase that consisted of preparing the site map along with its content. The content included the S2K RI-50 training manual, the tests and corresponding question bank, and the online adaptive training module, along with the extensive site testing. The second phase included the participation of rheumatologists and trainees who completed the Website modules. The third was a quality assurance phase in which an online survey was developed to determine the satisfaction level of its users. Further modifications were implemented per participants' recommendations. RESULTS: The site has been online since it was registered in September 2010. Fourteen rheumatologists and rheumatology trainees from different centers reviewed and completed the material contained in the Website. The survey revealed acceptance among rheumatologists for the Website's content, design, and presentation. The Website was rated as user-friendly and useful in familiarizing investigators with the S2K RI-50. After completion of the training and examination modules, participants reported a suitable level of preparation to implement the S2K RI-50 in clinical trials and research settings in a timely manner. CONCLUSION: The Website includes training and examination modules that familiarize rheumatologists with the S2K RI-50 and assesses their competence to use the index. This prepares them for the use of the S2K RI-50 in clinical trials and research settings.
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 | 0.011 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".