Disease activity and biologic use in patients with psoriatic arthritis or rheumatoid arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To compare disease burden and biologic use among psoriatic arthritis (PsA) or rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients recruited to the Corrona registry. Retrospective study of patients with PsA or RA enrolled in Corrona between January 2002 and March 2013 and grouped in 2-year intervals. Clinical outcomes and biologic use were assessed. Biologic use increased over time in both cohorts, with 62 and 52% of patients with PsA and RA, respectively, receiving biologics by 2012-2013. However, 25 and 35% of patients with PsA and RA, respectively, continued to experience moderate/high disease activity. Overall, the progressive increase in biologic use accompanied progressive decreases in Clinical Disease Activity Index (from 14.2 to 10.4 for RA, and 12.4 to 8.1 for PsA) and mean Health Assessment Questionnaire score (from 0.36 to 0.34, and 0.3 to 0.24). Mean patient pain, the proportion of patients reporting morning stiffness, and the mean duration of morning stiffness remained similar for both cohorts. PsA and RA treated in the rheumatology setting had a comparable impact on patient quality of life and functional ability. Disease burden improved with increased biologic utilization in both groups; however, moderate/severe disease remains in a significant proportion of PsA and RA patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".