Biomechanical Factors May Be the Main Contributor to Entheseal Changes in Normal Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To the Editor: We compliment Bakirci, et al for their article1 on the prevalence of ultrasound (US) elementary lesions at mainly lower extremity enthesis sites in 80 (50 female, 30 male) healthy adults (20–80+ yrs) and their analyses of contributory factors. We also compliment the accompanying editorial by Hánová, et al 2. The core set of US enthesitis elementary lesions defined by the Outcomes in Rheumatology (OMERACT) group3 were analyzed in the following categories: (1) inflammation (hypoechogenicity and/or increased thickening of the tendon insertion, and power Doppler activity); (2) damage (enthesophytes, calcification, and erosions); and (3) total US scores, all within a 2-mm distance of the bone cortex1. The Bakirci, et al article1 followed a similar US study by Guldberg-Møller, et al 4 of 64 (32 female, 32 male) healthy adults (20–59 yrs) that did not analyze the total US score or its damage and inflammation components. The Bakirci, et al article1 concluded, “These results support the effect of biomechanical forces … Address correspondence to Dr. A. Masi, University of Illinois College of Medicine at Peoria, One Illini Dr, Box 1649, Peoria, IL 61656, USA. Email: amasi{at}uic.edu.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".