MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103067001 · doi:10.1093/rheumatology/keh070

The health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) is strongly predictive of good outcome in early diffuse scleroderma: results from an analysis of two randomized controlled trials in early diffuse scleroderma

2004· review· en· W2103067001 on OpenAlexaff
Naqib Sultan

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish journal of rheumatology · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Sclerosis and Related Diseases
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRheumatoid arthritisScleroderma (fungus)Physical therapyHealth assessmentOutcome (game theory)Internal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Scoring poorly on the health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) has recently been shown to be a strong predictor of morbidity and mortality in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), while a good HAQ score is predictive of a better outcome. In patients presenting with early diffuse scleroderma prognosis is variable. Our goal was to determine possible baseline predictors of future good outcomes. METHODS: We used the raw data from two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in early diffuse scleroderma: methotrexate (Pope et al.) and D-penicillamine (Clements et al.). Subjects in the methotrexate trial were divided into the following groups: (1) those with at least 20% improvement in the primary outcome measurements [patient global assessment, physician global assessment, UCLA skin tethering score, modified Rodnan skin score (MRSS), DLCO as % predicted and HAQ disability] at 1 yr vs (2) the others. Baseline factors (including age, gender, skin scores, physician and patient global assessments, HAQ disability and pain scores, DLCO and physical parameters) were analysed to find baseline variables strongly correlated with later improvement. These variables were explored in the D-penicillamine trial to determine if (in a separate trial) they were still predictive of improved outcome at 1 and 2 yr. Adjusted models were used to find baseline predictors of good outcome. The median HAQ-DI was 1.3 (methotrexate) and 1.0 (D-penicillamine). RESULTS: A baseline HAQ disability score of less than the median was predictive of at least a 20% improvement at 1 and 2 yr with odds ratios of 1.77 to 5.05, in four of the five outcome measurements (in both groups); with strongly significant P values for 3 of 5 outcomes (UCLA skin score, MRSS, patient global skin score; P<0.02) from the methotrexate study group. These three outcomes were strongly correlated with improvement (r between 0.25 and 0.35). Although data from the D-penicillamine trial were less convincing, in both trials the less than median HAQ-DI and HAQ pain scores showed a stronger association with improved outcome, more so than age, gender, skin score and baseline global assessment. CONCLUSION: A low baseline HAQ (defined as less than the median HAQ score) is predictive of improved outcome in diffuse scleroderma at 1 and 2 yr.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.009
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations36
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish journal of rheumatologySame topicSystemic Sclerosis and Related DiseasesFrench-language works237,207