MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2151367211 · doi:10.1007/bf03404346

Characteristics of subjects self-reporting arthritis in a population health survey: distinguishing between types of arthritis.

2010· article· en· W2151367211 on OpenAlexaffabout
Geneviève Gariépy, Michel Rossignol, Abby Lippman

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineArthritisEpidemiologyRheumatoid arthritisPopulationPhysical therapyOsteoarthritisCommunity healthGerontologyFamily medicineAlternative medicinePublic healthInternal medicineEnvironmental healthPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Arthritis is a broad term covering disparate diseases with varying prognoses. Epidemiological surveys are important tools for arthritis research, but they either fail to specify arthritis subtypes or they provide self-reported arthritis data that are potentially misclassified. This limits their use for research about arthritis subgroups. This study describes and compares characteristics of subjects self-reporting subtypes of arthritis in a Canadian epidemiological survey. We also consider the feasibility of developing methods for distinguishing subtypes of arthritis in such population surveys. METHODS: Using data from 119,904 adult participants in the Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) cycle 3.1, we identified those self-reporting one of four subtypes of arthritis and compared the four groups with regard to socio-demographic status, lifestyle and health characteristics, medication use, health care utilization and functional outcomes. Cross-tabulations of weighted prevalence were estimated and tested for statistical significance using the chi-square test. RESULTS: Descriptive results showed very few distinguishing characteristics across self-reported arthritis subtypes on 34 investigated variables. Participants with osteoarthritis were more likely to be older and female than other groups. Statistical testing showed no difference between rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis and "other" type of arthritis for physical activity level, health conditions, medication use, health care utilization and functional limitations. DISCUSSION: Characteristics of subjects who self-report different types of arthritis in a typical population health survey (CCHS) are not sufficiently dissimilar to justify valid data analyses and interpretation by arthritis subgroup. Future studies might focus on identifying and implementing supplemental questionnaire items in epidemiological population surveys.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.402
Threshold uncertainty score0.799

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies→French-language works237,207→