Bibliographic record
Abstract
Childhood arthritis, including juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA)1, is a group of diseases whose face has changed over the last 3 decades. Phenomenal new treatment approaches, available widely in developed and some developing nations2,3, have turned once crippling disorders into conditions for which new challenges have emerged. While the severe, deforming, and crippling effects of arthritis are to a large degree a thing of the past (at least in resource-rich nations), children with arthritis still face a number of challenges. Most children with JIA have ongoing pain4,5, and many do not have the same level of social and role participation as their healthy peers. Traditional approaches to therapy for children who have arthritis centered around strengthening and range of motion exercises targeted toward specific joints. For example, many of my arthritis patients, well into the 1990s, were admitted to a rehabilitation center for splinting, pool therapy, and individual joint exercises. With the onset of more powerful biologic and nonbiologic disease-modifying treatments, this is now rarely necessary. In more recent years the approach of many, including our team, is to shift the focus of therapy toward fitness exercise — an “exercise as medicine” approach. This is predicated on the knowledge that children with arthritis are less active than their peers and are in poorer physical condition6. By reversing poor physical fitness, it is possible that … Address correspondence to Dr. B.M. Feldman, 555 University Ave., Toronto, Ontario M5G 1X8, Canada. E-mail: brian.feldman{at}sickkids.ca
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".