A comparison of clinical outcomes in PPMS in the INFORMS original trial data set
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The expanded disability status scale (EDSS) is the standard clinical outcome measure in primary progressive multiple sclerosis (PPMS), even though the timed 25-foot walk (T25FW), nine-hole peg test (NHPT) or combinations of these measures may be more useful. The paced auditory serial addition test (PASAT) is a widely used cognitive measure in MS, but little is known about change in PASAT scores over time in PPMS. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to compare clinical outcome measures in a large PPMS trial data set. METHODS: We determined significant worsening events on the EDSS, T25FW and NHPT, and PASAT scores over the course of this 3-year trial. We compared unconfirmed, confirmed and sustained disability worsening and contrasted disability worsening with similarly defined improvement. We examined the association of baseline characteristics with the risk of disability worsening at 12, 24 and 36 months with logistic regression models. RESULTS: The EDSS and T25FW showed most worsening events, while only few patients worsened on the NHPT. Adding the NHPT to a combined outcome added only few further worsening events. PASAT scores slightly increased over time, possibly due to a practice effect. CONCLUSION: Both the EDSS and T25FW, but not NHPT or PASAT, appear to be useful outcome measures in PPMS.
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 | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".