MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101318970 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.110262

Proposed Severity and Response Criteria for Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data (RAPID3): Results for Categories of Disease Activity and Response Criteria in Abatacept Clinical Trials

2011· article· en· W2101318970 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Theodore Pincus, P. Hines, Martin Bergman, Yusuf Yazıcı, Lisa Rosenblatt, Ross Maclean

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBristol-Myers SquibbAmgen
KeywordsAbataceptMedicineRheumatoid arthritisKappaInternal medicinePhysical therapyClinical trialSeverity of illnessRituximab

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: An index is needed to assess the status of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), as none of the existing measures are applicable to all individual patients. The 28-joint Disease Activity Score (DAS28) is the most specific and widely used index. Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data (RAPID3) is an index containing only the 3 patient self-report core dataset measures, without a laboratory test or formal joint count, and with simple scoring. RAPID3 is correlated significantly with DAS28, but calculated in 5-10 seconds on a Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ), compared to 114 seconds for DAS28. METHODS: DAS28 (0-10 scale) categories for high, moderate, and low activity, and remission (≤ 2.6, 2.6-3.2, 3.21-5.1, and > 5.1, respectively) and proposed RAPID3 (0-30 scale) categories for severity (0 ≤ 3, 3.1-6, 6.1-12, and > 12) were compared in patients taking abatacept and control-treated patients at the endpoint of the Abatacept in Inadequate Response to Methotrexate (AIM) and the Abatacept Trial in Treatment of Anti-TNF INadequate Responders (ATTAIN) clinical trials, using cross-tabulations and kappa statistics. RESULTS: Overall, 92%-99% of patients classified as having high DAS28 activity had high or moderate RAPID3 severity, while 64%-83% in DAS28 remission had RAPID3 low severity or remission; 50%-82% of patients with good or poor EULAR responses had good or poor RAPID3 responses. Kappa values ranged from 0.25 to 0.48, and weighted kappas from 0.32 to 0.52, indicating fair to moderate agreement for the 2 indices. CONCLUSION: Proposed RAPID3 severity and response categories yield comparable results to DAS28 and EULAR criteria in AIM and ATTAIN. DAS28 is more specific for clinical trials. RAPID3 does not preclude also scoring DAS28, and may be informative in the infrastructure of routine care.

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)0.150
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.226
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.793

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1500.226
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations40
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesFrench-language works237,207