Juvenile Psoriatic Arthritis: Longterm Outcome and Differentiation from Other Subtypes of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes in patients with juvenile psoriatic arthritis (PsA) with those in patients with other juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) subtypes, and to evaluate characteristics and genetic markers that may differentiate PsA from other subtypes of JIA. METHODS: JIA patients first admitted between 1980 and 1985 were clinically examined after a median of 15 years. Health status was reassessed by the Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) after a median of 23 years. Of 336 JIA patients, 31 (9%) had PsA. RESULTS: Predictors of PsA were psoriasis in the patient (OR 12.06, p = 0.004) or first-degree relative (OR 30.86, p < 0.001), dactylitis (OR 10.97, p < 0.001), and ankle/toe arthritis (OR 3.04, p = 0.038) within the first 6 months. HLA-DRB1*11/12 status (OR 2.69, p = 0.040) and onset after age 6 years (OR 4.41, p = 0.004) differentiated PsA from either oligoarthritis or polyarthritis. After 15 years, PsA patients had poorer physical health than healthy population controls (p = 0.001). After 23 years, the SF-36 physical scores were poorer in PsA patients than in those with either oligoarthritis or polyarthritis (p < 0.045). The need for disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and/or anti-tumor necrosis factor agents was present in 33% of PsA versus 8% in oligoarthritis and 13% in either oligoarthritis or polyarthritis patients (p < 0.001 and p = 0.002, respectively). CONCLUSION: In addition to a history of psoriasis, dactylitis, ankle or toe arthritis, and DRB1*11/12 in children with JIA indicate the likelihood of PsA, a subtype associated with unfavorable outcome.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".