The Modification of the American College of Rheumatology Preliminary Diagnostic Criteria for Fibromyalgia Should Be Supplemented and Revised
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To the Editor: The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1990 criteria (1990 criteria) had been virtually the sole diagnostic criteria for fibromyalgia (FM) until the ACR preliminary diagnostic criteria for FM (2010 criteria)1 were reported. In 2011, a modification of the ACR preliminary diagnostic criteria for FM (2011 criteria)2 was reported. Because the 2011 criteria are confusing, they should be supplemented and revised. 1. The abstract of an article that includes the 2011 criteria has the following diagnostic criteria: FM symptom scale/score ≥ 132. However, the appendix has the following diagnostic criteria: Widespread Pain Index ≥ 7 and Symptom Severity Score ≥ 5 or Widespread Pain Index between 3–6 and Symptom Severity Score ≥ 92. Which is correct? Or, do these different descriptions have a clear purpose? 2. In the Materials and Methods2 the widespread pain questionnaire asks patients to … Address correspondence to Dr. Toda; E-mail: goutattack{at}yahoo.co.jp
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 | 0.003 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.021 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.009 |
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".