Assessing Vasculitis in Giant Cell Arteritis by Ultrasound: Results of OMERACT Patient-based Reliability Exercises
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To test the reliability of Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials (OMERACT) consensus-based ultrasound definitions for normal and vasculitic temporal and axillary arteries in patients with giant cell arteritis (GCA) and in controls. METHODS: A preliminary 1-day meeting and a full 3-day meeting fulfilling OMERACT Ultrasound Group guidelines were held. Temporal and axillary arteries were examined at 2 timepoints by 12 sonographers on 4 patients with GCA and 2 controls. The aim was to test inter- and intrareader reliability for normal findings, halo sign, and compression sign. In both meetings, patients had established GCA. Pathology was more recent in the full meeting, which was preceded by 6 h of training. Scanning time was 15-20 min instead of 10-13 min. RESULTS: In the preliminary exercise, interreader reliabilities were fair to moderate for the overall diagnosis of GCA (Light κ 0.29-0.51), and poor to fair for identifying vasculitis in the respective anatomical segments (Light κ 0.02-0.46). Intrareader reliabilities were moderate (Cohen κ 0.32-0.64). In the main exercise, interreader reliability was good to excellent (Light κ 0.76-0.86) for the overall diagnosis of GCA, and moderate to good (Light κ 0.46-0.71) for identifying vasculitis in the respective anatomical segments. Intrareader reliability was excellent for diagnosis of GCA (Cohen κ 0.91) and good (Cohen κ 0.71-0.80) for the anatomical segments. CONCLUSION: OMERACT-derived definitions of halo and compression signs of temporal and axillary arteries are reliable in recent-onset GCA if experienced sonographers (> 300 examinations) have 15-20 min for a standardized examination with prior training and apply > 15 MHz probes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".