The Serological Status Affects the Prognostic Role of Salivary Gland Histology in Primary Sjögren Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We read with interest the article by Sharma, et al that evaluated a cohort of patients with symptoms of mucosal dryness undergoing diagnostic workup for the suspicion of primary Sjögren syndrome (pSS)1. The assessment also included a minor salivary gland (MSG) biopsy and patients were classified as pSS if fulfilling the histological [focus score (FS) ≥ 1], serological (anti-Ro based on the American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism set or either anti-Ro or anti-La based on the American-European Consensus Group set), or both criteria2,3. Among the 229 subjects classified as having pSS, the authors observed a FS = 0 in 51 subjects (22%), between 0 and 1 in 11 subjects (5%), and ≥ 1 in 167 subjects (73%). According to this, patients were divided in 3 groups, and clinical and serological features were compared. In the FS ≥ 1 group, only patients with anti-Ro … Address correspondence to Dr. F. Carubbi, MD, PhD, Rheumatology Unit, Department of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Science, School of Medicine, University of L’Aquila, L’Aquila, Italy; Department of Medicine, ASL1 Avezzano-Sulmona-L’Aquila, L’Aquila, Italy. Email: francescocarubbi{at}libero.it.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".