Factors Associated with a Longer Time to Access Pediatric Rheumatologists in Canadian Children with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Research on Arthritis in Canadian Children Emphasizing Outcomes (ReACCh Out) cohort is a prospective inception cohort of patients with newly diagnosed juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) seen in 16 Canadian pediatric rheumatology (PR) centers. We used data from this cohort to explore factors associated with longer time from symptom onset to the first visit to (PR), and with longer time from first visit to a diagnosis of JIA. METHODS: We included children enrolled in ReACCh Out within 6 months of JIA diagnosis, for whom the dates of symptom onset and first PR visit were recorded. We used Cox proportional hazard modeling to investigate the effects of history, physical examination, and laboratory evaluation on the interval from JIA symptom onset to first PR assessment. RESULTS: In total, 319 children from the cohort were included. Having a fever (hazard ratio 1.80, 95% CI 1.10, 2.93), any part South Asian ethnicity (HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.04, 2.95), highly educated parents (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.18, 2.44), and limp (HR 1.55, 95% 1.16, 2.06) were significantly associated with shorter time from symptom onset to first PR assessment, while a history of heel pain or enthesitis (HR 0.61, 95% 0.38, 0.97) was significantly associated with a longer time to first PR visit. CONCLUSION: Children with a history of a fever, limp, any part South Asian ethnicity, or highly educated parents were more likely to see PR sooner than patients without these features, while children with a history of enthesitis received PR care later than those without enthesitis.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".