Absent “Window of Opportunity” in Smokers with Short Disease Duration. Data from BARFOT, a Multicenter Study of Early Rheumatoid Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the effect of disease duration and smoking on outcome in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Between 1996 and 2004, 1587 patients were included in the BARFOT early RA (disease duration ≤ 1 year) study in Sweden. European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), rheumatoid factor (RF), and antibodies to cyclic citrullinated peptide (anti-CCP) were recorded at study start and at 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: In total, 180 RA patients (11%) had disease duration ≤ 12 weeks. These patients achieved good EULAR response significantly more often at 3 and 12 months than patients with a longer disease duration despite having more aggressive disease [EULAR good response was achieved by 35% and 35% at 3 and 12 months, respectively, among the patients with disease duration ≤ 12 weeks, by 35% and 41% of patients with disease duration of 13-24 weeks, and by 28% and 33% of patients with disease duration of 25-52 weeks (p = 0.02 for 3 months; p = 0.02 for 12 months)]. There was a significant correlation between improvement in Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS28), its individual variables, and Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and disease duration up to 12 months after study start. For smokers, no such trend was seen. CONCLUSION: Up to 12 months after inclusion in the study, there was a significant correlation between improvement in DAS28, its individual components, and HAQ and disease duration, with patients who had a shorter disease duration improving most. Smokers had poorer EULAR response and showed no improvement with regard to disease duration.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".