Prospective Evaluation of Clinical and Ultrasound Findings in Ankle Disease in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Importance of Ankle Ultrasound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To prospectively compare clinical examination of the ankle structures with ultrasound (US) findings. METHODS: In 42 children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA; 25 girls, 17 boys, mean age 11.3 yrs, range 2.3-22.3 yrs), a total of 61 swollen/painful ankles were assessed clinically and ultrasonographically. Accurate clinical examination of the entire ankle joint was performed, focusing especially on 3 regions - tibiotalar joint and medial and lateral tendons. Clinical and US findings were both scored 0-3 (normal-severe). RESULTS: US demonstrated no signs of tibiotalar joint effusion in 14 out of 43 ankles considered clinically involved. For the medial tendons, US showed tenosynovitis in 13 ankles out of 31 thought to be clinically normal; and for the lateral tendons, of the 19 deemed to be clinically involved, less than 50% had involvement on US. Very poor agreement was observed comparing the clinical and US scores for the 3 regions: tibiotalar joint, kappa = 0.3; medial tendons, kappa = 0.24; lateral tendons, kappa = 0.25. With regard to other ankle structures, only 39% of the subtalar (talocalcaneal) joints considered clinically involved were deemed abnormal on US. Finally, of the 10 ankles with talonavicular US effusion, only 2 were considered clinically involved. CONCLUSION: Using US findings as the "gold standard," clinical examination of the ankle in children with JIA was found to be inadequate in identifying the structures involved. US assessment prior to any glucocorticoid injection should be considered to improve the outcome. A prospective study comparing the outcome following clinical- versus US-guided ankle joint injection should be undertaken, to confirm our findings.
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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".