Fibromyalgia and the Prediction of Two‐Year Changes in Functional Status in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Previous cross-sectional studies have shown that rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients with fibromyalgia (FM) have higher disease activity, greater medical costs, and worse quality of life compared to RA patients without FM. We determined the impact of FM on 2-year changes in the functional status of RA patients in a prospective study. METHODS: Subjects included participants in the Brigham Rheumatoid Arthritis Sequential Study who were enrolled in a substudy of the effects of pain in RA. Subjects completed questionnaires, including the Multi-Dimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ) and Polysymptomatic Distress (PSD) scale, semiannually, and underwent physical examination and laboratory tests yearly. RESULTS: Of the 156 included RA subjects, 16.7% had FM, while 83.3% did not. In a multivariable linear regression model adjusted for age, sex, race, baseline MDHAQ score, disease duration, rheumatoid factor/cyclic citrullinated peptide antibody seropositivity, disease activity, and psychological distress, RA patients with FM had a 0.14 greater 2-year increase in MDHAQ score than RA patients without FM (P = 0.021). In secondary analyses examining the association between continuous PSD scale score and change in MDHAQ, higher PSD scale scores were significantly associated with greater 2-year increases in MDHAQ score (β coefficient 0.013, P = 0.011). CONCLUSION: Both the presence of FM and increasing number of FM symptoms predicted worsening of functional status among individuals with RA. Among individuals with RA and FM, the magnitude of the difference in changes in MDHAQ was 4- to 7-fold higher than typical changes in MDHAQ score among individuals with established RA.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".