MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113365862 · doi:10.1002/art.20179

Validation and clinical significance of the Childhood Myositis Assessment Scale for assessment of muscle function in the juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies

2004· article· en· W2113365862 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis & Rheumatism · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInflammatory Myopathies and Dermatomyositis
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick ChildrenDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntraclass correlationMedicineJuvenile dermatomyositisInter-rater reliabilityPhysical therapyConstruct validityMyositisConfidence intervalInternal medicineRating scaleDiseasePsychometricsPsychologyClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine the measurement characteristics of the Childhood Myositis Assessment Scale (CMAS) in children with juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (juvenile IIM), and to obtain preliminary data on the clinical significance of CMAS scores. METHODS: One hundred eight children with juvenile IIM were evaluated on 2 occasions, 7-9 months apart, using various measures of physical function, strength, and disease activity. Interrater reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness of the CMAS were examined. The minimum clinically important difference (MID) and CMAS scores corresponding to various degrees of physical disability were estimated. RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficient for 26 patients assessed by 2 examiners was 0.89, indicating very good interrater reliability. The CMAS score correlated highly with the Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (C-HAQ) score and with findings on manual muscle testing (MMT) (r(s) = -0.73 and 0.73, respectively) and moderately with physician-assessed global disease activity and skin activity, parent-assessed global disease severity, and muscle magnetic resonance imaging (r(s) = -0.44 to -0.61), thereby demonstrating good construct validity. The standardized response mean was 0.81 (95% confidence interval 0.53, 1.09) in patients with at least 0.8 cm improvement on a 10-cm visual analog scale for physician-assessed global disease activity, indicating strong responsiveness. In bivariate regression models predicting physician-assessed global disease activity, MMT remained significant in models containing the CMAS (P = 0.03) while the C-HAQ did not (P = 0.4). Estimates of the MID ranged from 1.5 to 3.0 points on a 0-52-point scale. CMAS scores corresponding to no, mild, mild-to-moderate, and moderate physical disability, respectively, were 48, 45, 39, and 30. CONCLUSION: The CMAS exhibits good reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness, and is therefore a valid instrument for the assessment of physical function, muscle strength, and endurance in children with juvenile IIM. Preliminary data on MID and corresponding levels of disability should aid in the clinical interpretation of CMAS scores when assessing patients with juvenile IIM.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.270 · 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