Patient-Reported Outcomes Among Transition-Age Young Adults With Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient-reported care utilization and outcomes among young adults with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), including factors associated with complete transfer to adult rheumatology. METHODS: We included young adults with JIA enrolled in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Registry from 2015 to 2019 with age ≥ 18 years at their last clinical site visit. We used data from the CARRA Registry Long-term Follow-up program, which follows inactive CARRA Registry patients and collects patient-reported information through phone surveys. We compared the characteristics of respondents with complete and incomplete transfer to adult rheumatology care at their first Long-term Follow-up phone survey. RESULTS: We identified 540 young adults with JIA; 187 (35%) responded to the Long-term Follow-up phone survey. The 54% of respondents with complete transfer to adult rheumatology were slightly older and reported more self-assessed disease activity, morning stiffness, and pain compared to those with incomplete transfer. Biologic use was high at both timepoints and did not differ by transfer status. Patients who completed the transfer were more likely to have private insurance and be actively pursuing postsecondary education compared to those with an incomplete transfer. Across the cohort, 65% reported problems with pain or discomfort and 45% with anxiety or depression. CONCLUSION: Young adult respondents with JIA in the CARRA Registry commonly report persistent medication use, but still report more problems with pain as compared to population norms. Additional work is needed to understand how best to address comorbid pain around the period of transition to adult care.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".