Radiographic Evaluation of Sacroiliac Joints in Axial Spondyloarthritis — Still Worth Performing?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radiographic evaluation of sacroiliac (SI) joints aimed at detection of radiographic sacroiliitis was for many years the only way to depict inflammatory (or more correctly — postinflammatory) changes in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) prior to development of bony changes in the spine (syndesmophytes/bony ankyloses). Consequently, definite radiographic sacroiliitis (≥ grade II both sides or ≥ grade III unilaterally) was included in the modified New York criteria for AS (1984)1 as an obligatory criterion in addition to clinical ones. In the following years, these criteria were used not only for classification but also for making a diagnosis of AS. It was, however, clear that definite structural changes in the SI joints visible on radiography require months to years to develop. Identifying AS at an early stage became possible with the introduction of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which is able to depict active inflammation (osteitis or bone marrow edema) prior to development of structural damage visible on radiographs. Of course, identifying disease early also means a wider range of outcomes, including milder forms developing structural damage slowly or not developing it at all. This fact resulted in a change in terminology and the introduction of the term “axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA),” which covers patients with structural damage in the SI joints visible on radiographs (radiographic axSpA or AS), and patients without such damage (nonradiographic axSpA). Both subgroups (or stages) of axSpA are covered by the classification criteria for axSpA (2009)2,3 developed by the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS). These criteria consist of 2 arms — imaging and clinical. The more specific imaging arm is fulfilled if either definite radiographic sacroiliitis (as … Address correspondence to Prof. D. Poddubnyy; E-mail: denis.poddubnyy{at}charite.de
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".