MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078332400 · doi:10.1002/art.22627

Validation of the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada magnetic resonance imaging spinal inflammation index: Is it necessary to score the entire spine?

2007· article· en· W2078332400 on OpenAlexaffabout
Walter P. Maksymowych, Suhkvinder S. Dhillon, Roy Park, David Salonen, Robert D. Inman, R. Lambert

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Care & Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntraclass correlationMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingAnkylosing spondylitisPhysical therapyInternal medicineRadiologyPsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) spinal inflammation index has been developed to objectively measure inflammation in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and to assess change in response to therapeutic intervention. Scoring of the entire spine limits feasibility and a scoring method that records inflammation in only the more severely affected spinal segments may improve feasibility without sacrificing performance. METHODS: MRI films of 68 patients with AS were assessed in random order by 2 blinded readers. Interreader reliability was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient. Pre- and posttreatment MRI films of 29 patients randomized to placebo or anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (anti-TNFalpha) therapy were read by readers blinded to chronology, and responsiveness was assessed by effect size and standardized response mean. The performance of scores based on 6, 8, 10, and all 23 spinal discovertebral units (DVU) was compared. RESULTS: The median number of affected spinal levels per patient was 6.0 and 62% of all affected levels were included when analysis was limited to only the 6 most severely affected levels per patient. Comparison of DVU scores that were limited to only the more severely affected DVU (6-, 8-, 10-DVU score) with scores for all 23 spinal DVU showed excellent interreader reliability for status and change scores (Spearman's correlation >0.90) as well as similar construct validity. Responsiveness to anti-TNFalpha therapy was greater when the more limited scoring methods were used and was greatest with the 6-DVU score. CONCLUSION: The SPARCC MRI spinal inflammation index performs better when analysis is limited to a maximum of 6 most severely affected levels compared with assessment of the entire spine. This should improve its feasibility in clinical trials and research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations69
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis Care & ResearchSame topicSpondyloarthritis Studies and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207