Current Status of Efforts on Standardizing Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Report from the OMERACT MRI in JIA Working Group and Health-e-Child
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report on the progress of an ongoing research collaboration on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and describe the proceedings of a meeting, held prior to Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) 12, bringing together the OMERACT MRI in JIA working group and the Health-e-Child radiology group. The goal of the meeting was to establish agreement on scoring definitions, locations, and scales for the assessment of MRI of patients with JIA for both large and small joints. METHODS: The collaborative work process included premeeting surveys, presentations, group discussions, consensus on scoring methods, pilot scoring, conjoint review, and discussion of a future research agenda. RESULTS: The meeting resulted in preliminary statements on the MR imaging protocol of the JIA knee and wrist and determination of the starting point for development of MRI scoring systems based on previous studies. It was also considered important to be descriptive rather than explanatory in the assessment of MRI in JIA (e.g., "thickening" instead of "hypertrophy"). Further, the group agreed that well-designed calibration sessions were warranted before any future scoring exercises were conducted. CONCLUSION: The combined efforts of the OMERACT MRI in JIA working group and Health-e-Child included the assessment of currently available material in the literature and determination of the basis from which to start the development of MRI scoring systems for both the knee and wrist. The future research agenda for the knee and wrist will include establishment of MRI scoring systems, an atlas of MR imaging in healthy children, and MRI protocol requisites.
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 | 0.248 | 0.181 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".