The role of obesity on inflammation and damage in spondyloarthritis: a systematic literature review on body mass index and imaging.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic literature review was to evaluate the effect of obesity and/or body mass index (BMI) on radiographic findings of spondyloarthritis (SpA) for both axial and peripheral inflammation and damage. METHODS: Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases were screened on February 13, 2017. The titles and the abstracts were independently screened by two investigators. Articles that have evaluated the link between BMI and plain radiography, ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in SpA were investigated. RESULTS: The literature search resulted in 613 articles, 5 of which met the inclusion criteria for the final analysis. Studies mostly investigated the effect of BMI on axial disease and mostly in ankylosing spondylitis. The major finding was that a higher BMI was closely related with new bone formation including syndesmophytes, enthesophytes and also a higher modified Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spinal Score. Fewer studies looked at the effect of BMI on the peripheral enthesis which found a moderately positive correlation between the Madrid Sonographic Enthesitis Index for enthesitis on US and BMI. Gender was a significant factor to influence this link with one study correlated US enthesophyte scores with BMI in males but not in females. No studies on MRI met the inclusion criteria to be included. CONCLUSIONS: BMI is linked to both axial and peripheral new bone formation and entheseal inflammation by imaging, as supported by the limited number of studies in the literature. Its effect on the sacroiliac joint and spinal inflammation is not clear as MRI studies are lacking.
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 | 0.007 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".