Patient-reported Outcomes in Polymyalgia Rheumatica
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To prospectively evaluate the disease course and the performance of clinical, patient-reported outcome (PRO) and musculoskeletal ultrasound measures in patients with polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR). METHODS: The study population included 85 patients with new-onset PMR who were initially treated with prednisone equivalent dose of 15 mg daily tapered gradually, and followed for 26 weeks. Data collection included physical examination findings, laboratory measures of acute-phase reactants, and PRO measures. Ultrasound evaluation was performed at baseline and Week 26 to assess for features previously reported to be associated with PMR. Response to corticosteroid treatment was defined as 70% improvement in PMR on visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: At baseline, 77% had hip pain in addition to shoulder pain and 100% had abnormal C-reactive protein or erythrocyte sedimentation rate. On ultrasound, 84% had shoulder findings and 32% had both shoulder and hip findings. Response to corticosteroid treatment occurred in 73% of patients by Week 4 and was highly correlated with percentage improvement in other VAS measures. Presence of ultrasound findings at baseline predicted response to corticosteroids at 4 weeks. Factor analysis revealed 6 domains that sufficiently represented all the outcome measures: PMR-related pain and physical function, an elevated inflammatory marker, hip pain, global pain, mental function, and morning stiffness. CONCLUSION: PRO measures and inflammatory markers performed well in assessing disease activity in patients with PMR. A minimum set of outcome measures consisting of PRO measures of pain and function and an inflammatory marker should be used in practice and in clinical trials in PMR.
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 | 0.010 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".