Are the New ACR/EULAR Criteria the Ultimate Answer for Polymyalgia Rheumatica Classification?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) is a diagnostic limbo. If a patient is evaluated by an experienced clinician who records the usual set of signs and symptoms along with the pertinent increased inflammatory markers, the diagnosis is usually correct. However, in several instances, PMR may evolve or transform into elderly onset rheumatoid arthritis (EORA), a switch that cannot be easily predicted and is usually recognized only during followup1. When less experienced clinicians are involved, overdiagnosis and underdiagnosis of PMR are relatively frequent because several conditions may mimic the disease, and a gold standard for diagnosis confirmation is lacking. The availability of the recent American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) criteria is expected to improve PMR classification2. Clinicians may also be enticed to apply these criteria in the individual patient although, as widely stated3, criteria should be used for classification only. The multifaceted essence of PMR may account for the wide range of its clinical presentations, making it difficult to identify a 1-size-fits-all set of criteria. In this issue of The Journal , Ozen, et al 4 describe a multicenter study dealing with the comparison of different sets of PMR classification criteria, including the ACR/EULAR criteria. The main findings of this study, which confirmed the overall good performance of the criteria, are that they are not optimal in differentiating PMR from seronegative polyarthritis and that, if a cutoff for laboratory inflammation is included, performance can increase. By comparing the existing sets of criteria, several studies from the literature obtained different results (Table 12,4,5,6,7,8,9). In Ozen’s study, the new ACR/EULAR criteria showed a moderate-to-good discriminating capacity between PMR and non-PMR. However, the best performance was obtained by the Chuang, … Address correspondence to Dr. D. Camellino, Research Laboratory and Academic Division of Clinical Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Genoa, Viale Benedetto XV, 6, 16132 Genoa, Italy. E-mail: dario.camel{at}gmail.com
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 | 0.016 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
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".