MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2788370008 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.170778

Patient-reported Outcomes, Resource Use, and Social Participation of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis Treated with Biologics in Alberta: Experience of Indigenous and Non-indigenous Patients

2018· article· en· W2788370008 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Cheryl Barnabé, Louise Crane, Tyler White, Brenda R. Hemmelgarn, Gilaad G. Kaplan, Liam Martin, Walter P. Maksymowych

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Arthritis Patient AllianceUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
FundersErasmus+Canadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIndigenousMedicineRheumatoid arthritisPhysical therapyQuality of life (healthcare)ArthritisInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To characterize patient-reported outcomes, resource use, and social participation during the course of biologic therapy for indigenous and non-indigenous patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Patients initiating biologic therapy (2004 to 2012) were characterized longitudinally for patient-reported outcomes including physical function measured by the Health Assessment Questionnaire, EQ-5D, well-being [Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36)], and visual analog scales for pain, fatigue, sleep, stiffness, and patient's global assessment. Resource use, participation in activities of daily living, and effect of RA on work productivity were also evaluated for change during therapy. RESULTS: Indigenous patients (n = 90) presented with significantly worse scores for global evaluation, pain, sleep, quality of life, well-being, and physical function compared to non-indigenous patients (n = 1400). All patient-reported outcomes improved significantly during treatment for patients in both groups, but pain, sleep, and SF-36 physical health score changes occurred at slower rates for indigenous patients [difference in slopes 0.09 (p = 0.029), 0.08 (p = 0.043), and -0.35 (p = 0.03), respectively]. Performance of daily activities was affected for 50% of indigenous compared to 37% of non-indigenous patients, with more use of community services and assistance from others. Employed indigenous patients reported twice the number of days being unable to work owing to RA compared to employed non-indigenous patients. Of the unemployed indigenous patients, 82% indicated they had stopped working because of arthritis, versus 48% of non-indigenous patients (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Indigenous patients have greater consequences of RA regarding experienced symptoms, health-related quality of life, disruption of performance of activities of daily living, and reduced employment participation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.574
Threshold uncertainty score0.848

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2018
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Rheumatology→Same topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies→French-language works237,207→