Harnessing Big Data, Smart and Digital Technologies and Artificial Intelligence for Preventing, Early Intercepting, Managing, and Treating Psoriatic Arthritis: Insights From a Systematic Review of the Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Rheumatological and dermatological disorders contribute to a significant portion of the global burden of disease. Big Data are increasingly having a more and more relevant role, being highly ubiquitous and pervasive in contemporary society and paving the way for new, unprecedented perspectives in biomedicine, including dermatology and rheumatology. Rheumatology and dermatology can potentially benefit from Big Data. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted according to the "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses" (PRISMA) guidelines, mining "Uno per tutti", a highly integrated and automated tool/meta-database developed at the University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy, and consisting of 20 major scholarly electronic databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE. Big Data- or artificial intelligence-based studies were judged based on the modified Qiao's critical appraisal tool for critical methodological quality assessment of Big Data/machine learning-based studies. Other studies designed as cross-sectional, longitudinal, or randomized investigations, reviews/overviews or expert opinions/commentaries were evaluated by means of the relevant "Joanna Briggs Institute" (JBI)'s critical appraisal tool for the critical methodological quality assessment. Results: Fourteen papers were included in the present systematic review of the literature. Most of the studies included concerned molecular applications of Big Data, especially in the fields of genomics and post-genomics. Other studies concerned epidemiological applications, with a practical dearth of studies assessing smart and digital applications for psoriatic arthritis patients. Conclusions: Big Data can be a real paradigm shift that revolutionizes rheumatological and dermatological practice and clinical research, helping to early intercept psoriatic arthritis patients. However, there are some methodological issues that should be properly addressed (like recording and association biases) and some ethical issues that should be considered (such as privacy). Therefore, further research in the field is warranted. Systematic Review Registration: Registration code 10.17605/OSF.IO/4KCU2.
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 | 0.032 | 0.087 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.029 | 0.023 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".