MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809364847 · doi:10.1177/1352458518783667

Predicting risk of secondary progression in multiple sclerosis: A nomogram

2018· article· en· W2809364847 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Manouchehrinia, Feng Zhu, Daniela Piani-Meier, Markus R. Lange, Diego G. Silva, Robert Carruthers, Anna Glaser, Elaine Kingwell, Helen Tremlett, Jan Hillert

Bibliographic record

VenueMultiple Sclerosis Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
FundersNeuroförbundetBiogen
KeywordsMultiple sclerosisNomogramMedicineOncologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: We aimed at designing a nomogram, a prediction tool, to predict the individual's risk of conversion to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) at the time of multiple sclerosis (MS) onset. METHODS: One derivation and three validation cohorts were established. The derivation cohort included 8825 relapsing-onset MS patients in Sweden. A nomogram was built based on a survival model with the best statistical fit and prediction accuracy. The nomogram was validated using data from 3967 patients in the British Columbia cohort, 176 patients in the ACROSS and 2355 patients in FREEDOMS/FREEDOMS II extension studies. RESULTS: Sex, calendar year of birth, first-recorded Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score, age at the first EDSS and age at disease onset showed significant predictive ability to estimate the risk of SPMS conversion at 10, 15 and 20 years. The nomogram reached 84% (95% confidence intervals (CIs): 83-85) internal and 77% (95% CI: 76-78), 77% (95% CI: 70-85) and 87% (95% CI: 84-89) external accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: The SPMS nomogram represents a much-needed complementary tool designed to assist in decision-making and patient counselling in the early phase of MS. The SPMS nomogram may improve outcomes by prompting timely and more efficacious treatment for those with a worse prognosis.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations78
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMultiple Sclerosis JournalSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207