Palindromic Rheumatism: Longterm Outcomes of 60 Patients Diagnosed in 1967–84
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study longterm outcomes of 60 patients with palindromic rheumatism (PR) diagnosed in 1967-1984. METHODS: A cohort of patients with PR was identified in Jyväskylä Central Hospital in 1967-84, and reexamined in 1984-86. In 2006, medical records of the patients were reviewed to analyze the proportion of patients who had developed chronic rheumatoid arthritis (RA), had joint replacement surgery, or had died. Patients' health status was reviewed by mail questionnaires including functional status on the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), pain, and the number of painful joints. RESULTS: Forty patients developed chronic RA over the observation period of over 20 years, among whom 38 patients within 10 years and 2 patients after 10 years. Twenty-four patients had died by 2006, 17 (42%) in the RA group and 7 (35%) in the non-RA group. Nine patients, all in the RA group (23%), had received 1 or more joint replacements. The mean HAQ score was 0.57 in the non-RA survivors (mean age 70 yrs), compared to 0.89 in the RA group (mean age 66 yrs) (p = 0.020, adjusted for age). Pain scores and the number of painful joints were similar between the groups. CONCLUSION: Two-thirds of the patients with PR developed chronic arthritis. The risk to develop chronic arthritis remained over 10 years. The RA group was characterized with functional declines and having joint replacements as longterm outcomes of the disease.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".