MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2260819637 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.150926

The Polysymptomatic Distress Scale Is Simple, Useful, and Effective in Clinical Care and Clinical and Epidemiology Studies

2016· letter· en· W2260819637 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Frederick Wolfe, Brian Walitt, Johannes J. Rasker, Robert S. Katz, Winfried Häuser

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2016
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFibromyalgiaEpidemiologyMEDLINEFamily medicineDistressQuality of Life ResearchAlternative medicinePsychiatryInternal medicinePublic healthClinical psychologyPathologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To the Editor: The Friend and Bennett editorial1 in a recent issue of The Journal continues a quarrel with the 2010 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Preliminary Diagnostic Criteria for Fibromyalgia (FM)2 and the followup research criteria of 20113 that was begun by Bennett shortly after first publication, and which has continued to date. It has taken the form of vigorous opposition to the acceptance and publication of our work during the manuscript review process, in disapprobation in editorials and interviews, and in articles opposed to our work. They label the many-authored 2010 ACR criteria and the 2011 modification as “Dr. Wolfe’s diagnostic criteria for fibromyalgia” in this editorial and the “Wolfe criteria” elsewhere. We know of no other ACR criteria currently in use that is referred to by the author’s name. Friend and Bennett’s objection to the Polysymptomatic … Address correspondence to Dr. F. Wolfe, National Data Bank for Rheumatic Diseases, 1035 N. Emporia, Ste. 230, Wichita, Kansas 67214, USA. E-mail: fwolfe{at}arthritis-research.org

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.113
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.113
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0110.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.366 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchFrench-language works237,207