Classification of rheumatologic opinion on early inflammatory arthritis: Harmonization of a heterogeneous standard
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Interrater variability limits rheumatologic opinion as a reference standard for early inflammatory arthritis (IA) classification. The study objectives were to determine whether rheumatologic opinion is associated with potential early IA classification methods despite high interrater variability, and to compare the relative strengths of those associations. METHODS: Eighteen rheumatologists independently classified 30 initial rheumatology presentation summaries as early IA or not and recommended a pharmacotherapy. Case fulfillment of the following classification methods was independently determined: early referral to rheumatology recommendation for rheumatoid arthritis (ERRR), common early IA cohort inclusion criteria (CEAC), and prevalent IA classification criteria (American College of Rheumatology [ACR]/European Spondylarthropathy Study Group [ESSG]). Associations between rheumatologic opinion, disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) recommendation, and each classification method were determined. RESULTS: Participating rheumatologists published on early IA and represented 3 continents. The median case was age 43 (interquartile range [IQR] 30-53) years, had 40 (IQR 24-104) weeks of symptoms, 60 (IQR 18-120) minutes of morning stiffness, a swollen joint count of 6 (IQR 1-13), and an erythrocyte sedimentation rate of 25 (IQR 10-51) mm/hour. The mean ± SD multiple-rater kappa for rheumatologic opinion on early IA was 0.16 ± 0.02. The common odds ratios for associations between rheumatologic opinion and ERRR, CEAC, and ACR/ESSG were 10.3 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 4.6-23.2), 4.4 (95% CI 2.5-7.7), and 0.7 (95% CI 0.4-1.1), respectively. Odds ratios for associations between DMARD recommendation and ERRR, rheumatologic opinion, CEAC, and ACR/ESSG were 18.7 (95% CI 8.1-43.2), 10.6 (95% CI 6.0-18.8), 2.8 (95% CI 1.7-4.6), and 0.5 (95% CI 0.3-0.7), respectively. CONCLUSION: Classification methods can be used to harmonize rheumatologic opinion of early IA despite high interrater variability. The ERRR is very strongly associated with both rheumatologic opinions of early IA and DMARD treatment recommendations.
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 | 0.127 | 0.228 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".