MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129669087 · doi:10.1002/art.39001

Diagnostic Utility of Candidate Definitions for Demonstrating Axial Spondyloarthritis on Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Spine

2014· article· en· W2129669087 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ulrich Weber, Zheng Zhao, Kaspar Rufibach, Veronika Zubler, R. Lambert, Stanley M. H. Chan, Mikkel Østergaard, Susanne Juhl Pedersen, Walter P. Maksymowych

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis & Rheumatology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversität ZürichUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingAnkylosing spondylitisAxial spondyloarthritisCohortBack painRadiologyPhysical therapyRadiographyNuclear medicineSurgerySacroiliitisInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: A recent consensus statement has suggested ≥3 corner inflammatory lesions (CILs) or several corner fatty lesions (CFLs) as candidate criteria indicative of axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the spine. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic utility of these cutoffs in nonradiographic axial SpA and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). METHODS: One hundred thirty consecutive patients with back pain who were ≤50 years of age and newly referred to 2 university clinics (cohorts A and B) were classified according to rheumatologist expert opinion based on results of clinical examination and pelvic radiography as having nonradiographic axial SpA (n = 50), AS (n = 33), or nonspecific back pain (n = 47). Cohort A also included 20 age-matched healthy controls. Four blinded readers assessed MRIs of the spine using the standardized Canada-Denmark module. Readers recorded CILs and CFLs in 23 discovertebral units. We tested the diagnostic utility (mean sensitivity and specificity over 4 readers) of the cutoff for the number of lesions on spinal MRI as proposed in the literature (≥2 or ≥3 CILs and ≥6 CFLs), and we tested for possible thresholds (from ≥1 CIL or CFL to ≥10 CILs or CFLs) for nonradiographic axial SpA and AS patients in both cohorts. RESULTS: None of the spinal thresholds (≥2 or ≥3 CILs and ≥6 CFLs) showed clinically relevant diagnostic utility (positive likelihood ratio [LR] range 1.38-2.36) when comparing patients with nonradiographic axial SpA to patients with nonspecific back pain. A threshold of ≥6 CILs had moderate to substantial diagnostic utility (positive LR 13.26 and 6.74 in cohorts A and B, respectively) in nonradiographic axial SpA, while ≥4 CILs showed small diagnostic utility (positive LR 3.83 and 2.72 in cohorts A and B, respectively) but specificities of >0.90. CONCLUSION: None of the previously proposed candidate criteria for a positive spinal MRI finding of axial SpA showed clinically relevant diagnostic utility in nonradiographic axial SpA. These results question the value of proposed definitions for a positive finding of SpA based on MRI of the spine alone.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.272
Threshold uncertainty score0.745

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.246
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations51
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis & RheumatologySame topicSpondyloarthritis Studies and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207