MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Axial involvement in psoriatic arthritis: An update for rheumatologists

2021· review· en· W3175937533 on OpenAlexaff
Denis Poddubnyy, Deepak R. Jadon, Filip Van den Bosch, Philip J. Mease, Dafna D. Gladman

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation
KeywordsMedicinePsoriatic arthritisDermatologyArthritisPsoriasisInternal medicineRheumatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a heterogenous, chronic, inflammatory musculoskeletal disease that can lead to peripheral and axial damage and loss of function. Axial involvement occurs in 25% to 70% of patients with PsA, varying greatly depending on its definition, with the key manifestations being sacroiliitis and/or spondylitis. However, there are no agreed-upon classification or diagnostic criteria for axial involvement in PsA and no consensus on treatment paradigms, which complicates management of PsA. There have only been a few studies assessing biologics in patients with PsA with axial involvement, and most treatment plans are based on evidence from patients with axial spondyloarthritis. Rheumatologists therefore face many challenges in the management of axial PsA, including diagnosis, differential diagnosis, and choice of appropriate treatment. In this review, we summarize the clinical presentation, imaging characteristics, differential diagnoses, treatment options, and prognosis of axial PsA, with the aim of increasing rheumatologists' knowledge of this phenotype of PsA and thereby aiding its optimal management.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations116
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Arthritis and RheumatismSame topicSpondyloarthritis Studies and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207