Ultrasonographic and Clinical Assessment of Peripheral Enthesitis in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis, Psoriasis, and Fibromyalgia Syndrome: The ULISSE Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the ULISSE study was to evaluate the prevalence of clinical and ultrasonographic (US) entheseal involvement in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), psoriasis, and fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS). METHODS: In this cross-sectional multicenter study, patients with PsA and psoriasis (not taking systemic therapy) and FMS underwent a clinical evaluation of the entheses, and a B-mode and power Doppler examination of 6 pairs of entheses. RESULTS: The study analyzed 140 patients with PsA, 51 with psoriasis, and 51 with FMS. Clinical and US examinations were performed in 1960 and 1680 entheses in the PsA group, and 714 and 612 entheses both in the psoriasis group and in the FMS group. In both per-patient and per-enthesis evaluation, the frequency of entheseal tenderness was higher in patients with FMS (92% of the patients and 46% of the entheses, compared with 66%/23% in the PsA group and 59%/18% in the psoriasis group). With US examination, signs of entheseal involvement were more frequent in both the per-patient and per-enthesis evaluation in PsA and psoriasis (about 90% of patients in both the PsA and psoriasis groups and 75% of patients in the FMS group had at least 1 site affected, and 54%, 41%, and 27% of the pairs of entheses in, respectively, PsA, psoriasis, and FMS patients showed at least 1 enthesis involved). CONCLUSION: The ULISSE study indicated that enthesitis is a common feature in patients with PsA, those with psoriasis, and in those with FMS if only clinical examination is used. US entheseal assessment showed findings more consistent with the 3 disorders.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".