Relationship between sex and antibodies to high mobility group proteins 1 and 2 in juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the frequencies of antibodies to high mobility group proteins 1 and 2 (HMG-1, HMG-2) in boys and girls with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). METHODS: Sera of 60 children (44 girls, 16 boys) with JIA were screened for the presence of anti-nuclear antibodies (ANA) and antichromatin antibodies by indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) on eukaryotic cells and were assayed further for the presence of antibodies to purified HMG-1 and HMG-2 by enzyme immunoassays. RESULTS: A positive test for ANA was significantly associated with the presence of antibodies to both HMG-1 and HMG-2. There was a significant association between antibodies targeting the chromosomal regions of metaphase cells and antibodies to both HMG-1 and HMG-2. Females were significantly more likely than males to have ANA, and specifically more likely to have antibodies to HMG-1. There was a significant association between the presence of antibodies to HMG proteins and chromosomal reactivity detected by IIF on HEp-2 cells. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that females with JIA are more likely to be ANA positive than males and more likely than males to have antibodies to HMG-1.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".