MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169468614 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.110654

Simultaneous Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis and Diabetes Mellitus Type 1 — A Finnish Nationwide Study

2011· article· en· W2169468614 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Heini Pohjankoski, Hannu Kautiainen, Matti Korppi, Anneli Savolainen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Diseases and Behçet’s Syndrome
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineArthritisJuvenileDiabetes mellitusType 1 diabetesJuvenile rheumatoid arthritisInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe the occurrence and main clinical and laboratory findings of patients having both juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and diabetes mellitus type 1 (DM-1) in a period of 30 years. METHODS: Eighty-two patients having simultaneous JIA and DM-1 were identified in the reimbursement registers of the Finnish National Institute of Insurance during the period 1976-2005. Data on their clinical histories were collected from patient files. RESULTS: Occurrence of simultaneous JIA and DM-1 increased 4.5-fold between the first (1976-85) and the last (1996-2005) decade. Prevalence of uveitis was 7%, of rheumatoid factor seropositivity 15%; 22% of patients had a third autoimmune disease [autoimmune disease (AID)], and 16% had serious psychiatric problems. CONCLUSION: The occurrence of patients with the 2 diseases, JIA and DM-1, increased over 3 decades. The prevalence of uveitis was low, the number of seropositive patients was high, and further cases of AID were frequent. Patients had multiple additional problems necessitating multiprofessional care.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations21
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicOcular Diseases and Behçet’s SyndromeFrench-language works237,207