Worse Quality of Life, Function, and Pain in Children With Enthesitis, Irrespective of Their Juvenile Arthritis Category
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the impact of enthesitis on patient-reported outcomes in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), irrespective of JIA category. METHODS: Children enrolled in the Research in Arthritis in Canadian Children Emphasizing Outcomes cohort were studied. Entheseal tenderness by physician examination in 33 defined locations, Juvenile Arthritis Quality of Life Questionnaire (JAQQ), Quality of My Life (QoML) Questionnaire, Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (C-HAQ), and a pain visual analog scale were completed at enrollment, every 6 months for 2 years, and then yearly up to 5 years. Analyses consisted of descriptive statistics, linear mixed models for longitudinal data, and analysis of covariance. RESULTS: Among 1,371 patients followed for a median of 35.3 months (interquartile range 22.1, 49.2), 214 (16%) had enthesitis, of whom 137 (64%) were classified as having enthesitis-related arthritis. After adjusting for JIA category and covariates, children with enthesitis reported higher JAQQ (mean raw score 2.71 versus 2.16, adjusted difference 0.41 points; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.22, 0.59), higher C-HAQ (0.47 versus 0.31, adjusted difference 0.14 points; 95% CI 0.07, 0.22), higher pain (3.01 versus 1.68, adjusted difference 0.94 points; 95% CI 0.64, 1.25), and lower QoML (7.02 versus 8.23, adjusted difference -0.80 points; 95% CI -1.09, -0.51) scores than children without enthesitis. These differences persisted up to 5 years. CONCLUSION: Children with enthesitis, regardless of JIA category, report worse patient-reported outcomes than those without enthesitis. Thus, enthesitis should be assessed in all children with JIA.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".