European consensus-based recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of rare paediatric vasculitides – the SHARE initiative
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The European initiative Single Hub and Access point for paediatric Rheumatology in Europe (SHARE) aimed to optimize care for children with rheumatic diseases. Systemic vasculitides are very rare in children. Consequently, despite recent advances, paediatric-specific information is sparse. The lack of evidence-based recommendations is an important, unmet need. This study aimed to provide recommendations for diagnosing and treating children with rare forms of childhood systemic vasculitis. METHODS: Recommendations were developed by a consensus process in accordance with the European League Against Rheumatism standard operating procedures. A systematic literature review informed the recommendations, which were devised and evaluated by a panel of experts via an online survey, and two consensus meetings using nominal group technique. Recommendations were accepted when ⩾ 80% of experts agreed. RESULTS: Ninety-three relevant articles were found, and 78 recommendations were accepted in the two consensus meetings. General, cross-cutting recommendations and disease-specific statements regarding the diagnosis and treatment of childhood-onset PAN, granulomatosis with polyangiitis, microscopic polyangiitis, eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis, and Takayasu arteritis are provided. CONCLUSION: These Single Hub and Access point for paediatric Rheumatology in Europe recommendations were formulated through an evidence-based consensus process to support uniform, high-quality standard of care for children with rare forms of paediatric systemic vasculitis.
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 | 0.075 | 0.140 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".