Early outcomes and improvement of patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis enrolled in a Canadian multicenter inception cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine early outcomes and early improvements in a prospective inception cohort of children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) treated with current standard therapies. METHODS: Patients selected were enrolled in an inception cohort of JIA, the Research in Arthritis in Canadian Children Emphasizing Outcomes Study. The juvenile rheumatoid arthritis core criteria set measures were completed at enrollment and 6 months later. Frequencies of normal values for each of the core set measures and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Pediatric 30, 50, and 70 (Pedi 70) criteria response rates achieved at 6 months after enrollment were calculated for each JIA-onset subtype group. RESULTS: Among 354 patients in the study, the median interval between diagnosis and enrollment was 0.7 months. At 6 months after enrollment, median values of active joint counts were highest in patients with rheumatoid factor (RF)-positive polyarthritis (4) and RF-negative polyarthritis (2), but were 0 or 1 for other subtypes. Fifty percent or more of patients with oligoarthritis, systemic arthritis, enthesitis-related arthritis, and undifferentiated arthritis had no active joints, and the ACR Pedi 70 criteria response rate was 48% or more in those with oligoarthritis, RF-negative polyarthritis, and systemic arthritis. CONCLUSION: With current management strategies in clinical practice, improvement in disease activity was noted in considerable proportions of patients in all of the JIA subtype groups, but low levels of disease activity persisted in many. We expect that these early outcomes will prove to be significant predictors of long-term outcomes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".