Consensus treatments for moderate juvenile dermatomyositis: Beyond the first two months. Results of the Second Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Consensus Conference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To use consensus methods and the considerable expertise contained within the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) organization to extend the 3 previously developed treatment plans for moderate juvenile dermatomyositis (DM) to span the full course of treatment. METHODS: A consensus meeting was held in Chicago on April 23-24, 2010, involving 30 pediatric rheumatologists and 4 lay participants. Nominal group technique was used to achieve consensus on treatment plans that represented typical management of moderate juvenile DM. A preconference survey of CARRA, completed by 151 (56%) of 272 members, was used to provide additional guidance to the discussion. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on timing and rate of steroid tapering, duration of steroid therapy, and actions to be taken if patients were unchanged, worsening, or experiencing medication side effects or disease complications. Of particular importance, a single consensus steroid taper was developed. CONCLUSION: We were able to develop consensus treatment plans that describe therapy for moderate juvenile DM throughout the treatment course. These treatment plans can now be used clinically, and data collected prospectively regarding treatment effectiveness and toxicity. This will allow comparison of these treatment plans and facilitate the development of evidence-based treatment recommendations for moderate 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 | 0.168 | 0.175 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".