Ultrasound of Subtalar Joint Synovitis in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results of an OMERACT Reliability Exercise Using Consensual Definitions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the intraobserver and interobserver reliability of the ultrasonographic (US) assessment of subtalar joint (STJ) synovitis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Following a Delphi process, 12 sonographers conducted an US reliability exercise on 10 RA patients with hindfoot pain. The anteromedial, posteromedial, and posterolateral STJ was assessed using B-mode and power Doppler (PD) techniques according to an agreed US protocol and using a 4-grade semiquantitative grading score for synovitis [synovial hypertrophy (SH) and signal] and a dichotomous score for the presence of joint effusion (JE). Intraobserver and interobserver reliability were computed by Cohen's and Light's κ. Weighted κ coefficients with absolute weighting were computed for B-mode and PD signal. RESULTS: Mean weighted Cohen's κ for SH, PD, and JE were 0.80 (95% CI 0.62-0.98), 0.61 (95% CI 0.48-0.73), and 0.52 (95% CI 0.36-0.67), respectively. Weighted Cohen's κ for SH, PD, and JE in the anteromedial, posteromedial, and posterolateral STJ were -0.04 to 0.79, 0.42-0.95, and 0.28-0.77; 0.31-1, -0.05 to 0.65, and -0.2 to 0.69; 0.66-1, 0.52-1, and 0.42-0.88, respectively. Weighted Light's κ for SH was 0.67 (95% CI 0.58-0.74), 0.46 (95% CI 0.35-0.59) for PD, and 0.16 (95% CI 0.08-0.27) for JE. Weighted Light's κ for SH, PD, and JE were 0.63 (95% CI 0.45-0.82), 0.33 (95% CI 0.19-0.42), and 0.09 (95% CI -0.01 to 0.19), for the anteromedial; 0.49 (95% CI 0.27-0.64), 0.35 (95% CI 0.27-0.4), and 0.04 (95% CI -0.06 to 0.1) for posteromedial; and 0.82 (95% CI 0.75-0.89), 0.66 (95% CI 0.56-0.8), and 0.18 (95% CI 0.04-0.34) for posterolateral STJ, respectively. CONCLUSION: Using a multisite assessment, US appears to be a reliable tool for assessing synovitis of STJ in RA.
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 | 0.021 | 0.050 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".