MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211154458 · doi:10.29173/pathways24

Rheumatoid Arthritis: An Examination of Arthropathy in Antiquity

2021· article· en· W3211154458 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Taylor Eagle

Bibliographic record

VenuePathways · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMusculoskeletal Disorders and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaleopathologyMedicineContext (archaeology)ArthropathyRheumatoid arthritisArthritisDifferential diagnosisPathologicalDermatologyPathologyOsteoarthritisArchaeologyImmunologyGeographyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arthropathy – or joint disease – is the most common post-cranial pathological change found in skeletal remains, both today and in the past. Responsible for a great amount of pain and discomfort in modern populations, arthropathy continues to be highly researched in current clinical and pale­opathological studies. Despite its frequency in an archaeological context, differentiation between various types of arthropathy can prove challenging. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA), for example, is historically underrepresented in the archaeological record. This may be due to a combination of the poor preservation of hand and foot bones (the locale where the bony alterations of RA begin), the non-specific appearance of RA lesions on bones, as well as other biases inherent in the bioar­cheological record. This article analyzes the origins and antiquity of RA, as well as some of the issues with differential diagnosis using clinical and paleopathological literature, including proba­ble and potential cases.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePathwaysSame topicMusculoskeletal Disorders and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207