Association of hand grip strength with disease activity, disability and quality of life in children and adolescents with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) affects wrist and hand joints leading to decrease hand function and patients' daily living activities. The assessment of hand grip strength (HGS) in children and adolescents with JIA is of major importance, and the association of HGS with JIA disease activity, disability and quality of life has not been explored. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate hand grip strength (HGS) in children and adolescents with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) compared to matched healthy peers. The secondary objective was to explore the relationship between HGS and JIA disease activity, disability, and quality of life. METHODS: This study involved 23 patients with JIA and 46 age and sex matched healthy controls. Hand held dynamometer was used to evaluate HGS for all study participants. Anthropometric parameters for all study participants were measured. Disease activity, physical function, and quality of life were assessed for the JIA group using juvenile arthritis disease activity score (JADAS-27), juvenile arthritis functionality scale (JAFS), and pediatric quality of life inventory (PedsQL) respectively. Laboratory marker of inflammation, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and plain radiography of hands were performed for all patients. RESULTS: Hand grip strength of children and adolescents with JIA was significantly weaker compared to matched controls (p < 0.001). Hand grip strength had a significant inverse correlation with JADAS-27 (r = - 0.467, p = 0.025), JAFS (r = - 0.650, p = 0.001) and a significant direct correlation with PedsQL (r = 0.438, p = 0.036). In addition, HGS was negatively correlated with ESR and duration of morning stiffness (r = - 0.489, p = 0.018 and r = - 0.201, p = 0.359, respectively). HGS was detected as an independent predictor of disease activity, disability, and quality of life in JIA patients in multivariate linear regression. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of HGS could be a simple non-invasive tool for assessing disease activity, disability and quality of life in JIA patients in clinical practice.
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 | 0.000 | 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".