Juvenile Psoriatic Arthritis (JPsA): juvenile arthritis with psoriasis?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Following the introduction of the ILAR criteria for juvenile idiopathic arthritis, juvenile psoriatic arthritis (JPsA) has become a better recognized category within the inflammatory arthritides of childhood. There are fewer reports describing the characteristics and long-term outcome of patients with JPsA than other subtypes of JIA.The aim of our study was to determine the long-term outcome and clinical course of patients with juvenile psoriatic arthritis (JPsA) and to define subgroups of JPsA. METHODS: Clinical records of all patients meeting criteria for JPsA were reviewed and divided into 4 groups depending on their clinical features and onset type. Patient characteristics and clinical features at onset and during follow-up were determined. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 119 patients: 65 with oligoarticular-onset (55%; persistent 44 and extended 21), 34 (29%) with RF(-) and 4 (3%) RF(+) polyarticular and 16 (13%) enthesitis-related arthritis (ERA). At diagnosis patients with ERA were oldest and more commonly male (p=0.001 and =0.01 respectively). Patients with a polyarticular course had more involvement of small joints of the hands and wrist when compared to patients with persistent oligoarticular and ERA (p<0.001) while patients with ERA had more hip and sacroiliac arthritis (p<0.001 for both). Nail changes were seen in 66 patients (57%) and were associated with DIP involvement (p=0.0034). OUTCOME: Time to first inactive disease on, but not off, therapy was significantly longer among patients with polyarticular course when compared to oligoarticular and ERA (p=0.016 and p=0.48 respectively). Patients with polyarticular course more frequently had contractures during follow-up than other groups (p=0.01). CONCLUSION: The long-term outcome of with JPsA was generally good. Patients with JPsA did not appear to form distinct sub-group of patients but rather resembled JIA patients with onset types without psoriasis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".