Prologue: 2012 Annual Meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2012 Annual Meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) was held in June 2012 in Stockholm, Sweden, and attended by rheumatologists, dermatologists, and representatives of biopharmaceutical companies and patient groups from around the world. In this Prologue we introduce discussions that were held among meeting attendees. Prior to the 2012 meeting, 2 GRAPPA members organized a Fellows Symposium adjacent to the European Academy of Dermatology and Venerology meeting in Verona, where they discussed comorbidities and treatments of patients with psoriasis. The 2012 GRAPPA meeting began with a trainee symposium, where 30 rheumatology fellows and dermatology residents presented their research work. Other presentations and discussions included a review of arthritis mutilans; dermatology issues including screening tools for psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and the instruments to measure psoriasis severity; cardiovascular and other comorbidities of psoriasis and PsA; development of criteria to define inflammatory arthritis, enthesitis, dactylitis, and spondylitis; distinctions between peripheral spondyloarthritis and PsA; the status of an ultrasound outcome measure for dactylitis; and updates on several GRAPPA projects, including a study of biomarkers to predict structural damage in PsA, the ongoing video project, and several education initiatives.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.199 | 0.125 |
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".