MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

1120 Determination of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the physician global assessment (PGA) in SLE

2021· article· en· W3214282195 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Erik Anderson, Meggan Mackay, Cynthia Aranow

Bibliographic record

VenueAbstracts · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsMedicineMinimal clinically important differenceReceiver operating characteristicFlareGold standard (test)Clinical trialProspective cohort studyInternal medicinePhysical therapyRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction The PGA is a SLE outcome measurement reflecting the physician’s assessment of a patient’s disease activity. It is considered a ‘gold standard’ and contributes to responder indices for clinical trials, as well as to definitions of the low lupus disease activity state (LLDAS) and remission. Although a few studies have evaluated its sensitivity to change, no studies have assessed its minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Our objective was to determine the MCID of the PGA using prospective data collected in a single center. Methods PGAs were scored prospectively by 3 physicians on consecutive patient visits; the difference between a visit PGA and the previous visit’s PGA was the ΔPGA. A disease flare visit was defined as a visit in which therapy was increased (initiation or increase of corticosteroid dose and/or DMARD or biologic agent). We constructed a receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve to visualize the performance of the ΔPGA for predicting flare and determined the MCID of the PGA for flare using an anchored approach by calculating Youden’s index for the ΔPGA in 0.1 increments. Results Data from 129 patient visits with ΔPGA and therapeutic decisions (therapy increase/flare or therapy decreased or no change/no flare) were available. The baseline PGA was between 0- 0.9 in 79 visits, 1.0-1.9 in 38 visits and between 2.0-3 in 12 visits. Flare occurred in 85 visits while no flare occurred in 44 visits with 43 (50.6%) of flares occurring with a baseline PGA between 0-0.9, 30 (35.3%) with a baseline PGA between 1-1.9 and 12 (14.1%) flares with a baseline between 2-3. The ROC curve for the performance of ΔPGA in predicting flare is shown in figure 1. The area under the curve was 0.774 (SE .034), p<0.001. A ΔPGA of 0.3 is associated with the highest Youden’s index. Conclusion Preliminary results from this small observational study suggest that the MCID for the PGA is 0.3. Larger studies evaluating the ΔPGA and flare, scored by multiple physicians are necessary.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAbstracts→Same topicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research→French-language works237,207→