Changes in the Presentation of Incident Gout and the Risk of Subsequent Flares: A Population-based Study over 20 Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine whether a change in the presentation of incident gout happened over the last 20 years and to determine the risk of subsequent gout flares after an initial gout attack. METHODS: All incident cases of gout were identified among residents of Olmsted County, Minnesota, diagnosed in 1989-1992 and 2009-2010 according to the earliest date fulfilling the 1977 American Rheumatism Association preliminary criteria, or the New York or Rome criteria for gout. Patients in both cohorts were then followed for up to 5 years. Cumulative incidence and person-year methods were used to compare flare rates, and conditional frailty models were used to examine predictors. RESULTS: A total of 429 patients with incident gout (158 patients in 1989-1992 and 271 patients in 2009-2010) were identified and followed for a mean of 4.2 years. The majority of patients were male (73%) and the mean age (SD) at gout onset was 59.7 (17.3) years. Classic podagra decreased significantly from 74% to 59% (p < 0.001). Cumulative incidence of first flare was similar in both cohorts (62% vs 60% by 5 yrs in 1989-1992 and 2009-2010, respectively; p = 0.70), but overall flare rate was marginally higher in 2009-2010 compared to 1989-1992 (rate ratio: 1.24). Hyperuricemia (HR 1.59) and kidney disease (HR 1.34) were significant predictors of future flares. CONCLUSION: Gout flares were common in both time periods. Hyperuricemia and kidney disease were predictors of future flares in patients with gout. Podagra as a presentation of gout has become relatively less frequent in recent years.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".