Characteristics and Course of Enthesitis in a Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis Inception Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the prevalence, associated characteristics, and course of enthesitis in a juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) inception cohort. METHODS: Canadian children newly diagnosed with JIA between 2005 and 2010 were categorized using International League of Associations for Rheumatology criteria at the 6-month visit and followed in the Research in Arthritis in Canadian Children Emphasizing Outcomes (ReACCh-Out) cohort for up to 5 years. The presence of entheseal tenderness on examination at 33 sites shown on a homunculus was recorded at 0, 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months after enrollment. Enthesitis was defined as entheseal tenderness at more than 1 site or on more than 1 occasion. Analyses consisted of descriptive statistics and linear mixed models for longitudinal data. RESULTS: Of 1,406 patients, 219 (16%) had enthesitis and, of those with enthesitis, 141 (64%) were classified as having enthesitis-related arthritis (ERA). Children with enthesitis were more often older (10.7 versus 7.5 years), male (57% versus 31%), and with polyarthritis (57% versus 41%) and sacroiliac involvement (30% versus 4%). Entheseal tenderness was most frequent at the calcaneal plantar fascial insertion (39%), Achilles tendon insertion (31%), and tibial tuberosity (30%). The mean number of tender entheseal sites decreased in parallel with active joint counts. There was no difference in active joint counts over time in children with or without enthesitis (P = 0.73). CONCLUSION: Enthesitis was observed in 16% of patients with JIA, but only two thirds were categorized as having ERA. Contrary to expectations, most children with enthesitis had polyarticular involvement. The course of enthesitis paralleled the course of active joint counts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".