Associations of clinical and inflammatory biomarker clusters with juvenile idiopathic arthritis categories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify discrete clusters comprising clinical features and inflammatory biomarkers in children with JIA and to determine cluster alignment with JIA categories. METHODS: A Canadian prospective inception cohort comprising 150 children with JIA was evaluated at baseline (visit 1) and after six months (visit 2). Data included clinical manifestations and inflammation-related biomarkers. Probabilistic principal component analysis identified sets of composite variables, or principal components, from 191 original variables. To discern new clinical-biomarker clusters (clusters), Gaussian mixture models were fit to the data. Newly-defined clusters and JIA categories were compared. Agreement between the two was assessed using Kruskal-Wallis analyses and contingency plots. RESULTS: Three principal components recovered 35% (three clusters) and 40% (five clusters) of the variance in patient profiles in visits 1 and 2, respectively. None of the clusters aligned precisely with any of the seven JIA categories but rather spanned multiple categories. Results demonstrated that the newly defined clinical-biomarker lustres are more homogeneous than JIA categories. CONCLUSION: Applying unsupervised data mining to clinical and inflammatory biomarker data discerns discrete clusters that intersect multiple JIA categories. Results suggest that certain groups of patients within different JIA categories are more aligned pathobiologically than their separate clinical categorizations suggest. Applying data mining analyses to complex datasets can generate insights into JIA pathogenesis and could contribute to biologically based refinements in JIA classification.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".