Repair of Radiographic Joint Damage Following Treatment with Etanercept in Psoriatic Arthritis Is Demonstrable by 3 Radiographic Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is characterized by varied radiographic features. We describe a patient with PsA with severe radiographic damage that improved significantly following treatment with etanercept. The improvement was documented by several methods of radiographic assessment. METHODS: Etanercept was introduced in September 2005. Radiographs of the hands and feet were read using 3 methods: the modified Steinbrocker method, the van der Heijde (vdH) modification of the Sharp method, and the Ratingen scoring system. RESULTS: In July 2009, radiographs of the hands and feet showed improvement in erosion score and joint space narrowing, while bony proliferation remained the same [43 by modified Steinbrocker, 26 by the vdH Sharp score (12 for erosions and 14 for joint space narrowing), and 56 by the Ratingen (18 for erosion and 38 for proliferation]. CONCLUSION: The 3 radiographic methods were useful in demonstrating improvement in joint scores. The modified Steinbrocker method, which is the simplest, was able to reveal improvement in our patient.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".