Canadian Rheumatologists’ Perspectives on Moderate Psoriatic Arthritis and Oligoarticular Psoriatic Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) substantially impairs quality of life. Clinical trials generally focus on polyarticular PsA, but less is known about the assessment and management of oligoarticular and moderate PsA. An online survey was conducted to determine Canadian rheumatologists' perspectives on the definition and treatment of oligoarticular and moderate PsA. METHODS: Regional and national experts treating patients with PsA were asked to complete an online survey to assess their approach to identifying and managing patients with PsA. Survey questions were developed based on guidance from a committee of Canadian rheumatologists. RESULTS: Sixty-four of 78 rheumatologists responded, representing 6 major Canadian provinces. Nearly half of respondents were in practice > 20 years. The majority of rheumatologists reported using swollen joint count (SJC) to describe moderate PsA (86.4%) and oligoarticular PsA (96.7%), and considered location of inflammation in PsA assessments. SJC cutoff scores for reporting moderate PsA varied among rheumatologists, suggesting lack of an agreed-upon definition for moderate PsA. Sixty-eight percent of rheumatologists identified access to treatment as the greatest challenge with oligoarticular PsA. CONCLUSION: According to the surveyed rheumatologists, SJC remains a key assessment variable when defining oligoarticular and moderate PsA. Although the number of joints is considered when determining the effect of PsA on patients, joint location and functional impairment are also considered when describing the disease as moderate. Access to treatment for patients with < 5 affected joints is challenging.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".