MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008455356 · doi:10.21037/qims.2019.12.11

Consensus approach for 3D joint space width of metacarpophalangeal joints of rheumatoid arthritis patients using high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography

2020· article· en· W3008455356 on OpenAlexaff
Kathryn S. Stok, Andrew J. Burghardt, Stéphanie Boutroy, M. Peters, Sarah L. Manske, Vincent A. Stadelmann, Nicolas Vilayphiou, Joop P. van den Bergh, Piet Geusens, Xiaojuan Li, Hubert Marotte, Bert van Rietbergen, Steven K. Boyd, Cheryl Barnabé

Bibliographic record

VenueQuantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsAlberta Bone and Joint Health InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantitative computed tomographyReproducibilityMetacarpophalangeal jointComputed tomographyComputer scienceJoint (building)MedicineNuclear medicineRadiologyMathematicsStatisticsSurgeryPathologyOsteoporosisBone mineral

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Joint space assessment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) by ordinal conventional radiographic scales is susceptible to floor and ceiling effects. High-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography (HR-pQCT) provides superior resolution, and may detect earlier changes. The goal of this work was to compare existing 3D methods to calculate joint space width (JSW) metrics in human metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints with HR-pQCT and reach consensus for future studies. Using the consensus method, we established reproducibility with repositioning as well as feasibility for use in second-generation HR-pQCT scanners. METHODS: Three published JSW methods were compared using datasets from individuals with RA from three research centers. A SPECTRA consensus method was developed to take advantage of strengths of the individual methods. Using the SPECTRA method, reproducibility after repositioning was tested and agreement between scanner generations was also established. RESULTS: When comparing existing JSW methods, excellent agreement was shown for JSW minimum and mean (ICC 0.987-0.996) but not maximum and volume (ICC 0.000-0.897). Differences were identified as variations in volume definitions and algorithmic differences that generated high sensitivity to boundary conditions. The SPECTRA consensus method reduced this sensitivity, demonstrating good scan-rescan reliability (ICC >0.911) except for minimum JSW (ICC 0.656). There was strong agreement between results from first- and second-generation HR-pQCT (ICC >0.833). CONCLUSIONS: The SPECTRA consensus method combines unique strengths of three independently-developed algorithms and leverages underlying software updates to provide a mature analysis to measure 3D JSW. This method is robust with respect to repositioning and scanner generations, suggesting its suitability for detecting change.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuantitative Imaging in Medicine and SurgerySame topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesFrench-language works237,207