MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4308142710 · doi:10.1210/jendso/bvac150.1057

ODP348 Regional disparities in functional impairment due to arthropathy in patients with acromegaly.

2022· article· en· W4308142710 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Syed A. Ahmad, Kevin Chen, Constance L. Chik, David Clarke, Aisha Ibrahim, Syed Ali Imran, Michel Ladouceur, Keillor Steeves, Michaela Title, Lisa Tramble, Stan VanUum, Yuqi Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Endocrine Society · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDashArthropathyAcromegalyPhysical therapyWilcoxon signed-rank testInternal medicineOsteoarthritisMann–Whitney U testGrowth hormonePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective While arthropathy is common in acromegaly (ACRO), its impact on the physical function of patients is not well understood. We sought to compare physical function between patients with a history of ACRO or with a nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas (NFA) who had previously undergone pituitary surgery. Methods Sex- and age-matched participants (n=34 for both groups) were recruited from the Halifax Neuropituitary Program. All ACRO patients were in remission with or without medical therapy. All patients completed validated questionnaires related to musculoskeletal disability and symptoms of the upper extremity (QuickDASH), functional impact of arthropathy in the weight-bearing joints (hips: HOOS-JR, knees: KOOS-JR, ankles: Quick-FAAM), and balance (ABC-6). We also assessed the number of falls in the past 12 months. HOOS-JR and KOOS-JR scores were compared using paired t-tests, whereas the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare DASH, DASH-Work, DASH-Instrument, Quick-FAAM, and ABC-6 scores between the two groups. Results ACRO compared with NFA patients, respectively, had higher upper-limb musculoskeletal disability and symptoms scores [17. 04 (0-70.45) vs. 4.55 (0-50. 00); p=0. 009]. However, there were no significant differences between the DASH-Work score or DASH-Instrument score between the two groups (p=0.317 and 0.18, respectively). ACRO patients had poorer functional scores for the hip compared with NFA (73.43±22.41 vs 86.45±15.43, p=0. 014) and knee (72.69±22.15 vs. 83.30±17.67, p=0. 056). However, there were no differences in ankle scores (p=0. 097). The number of falls within the last 12 months did not differ between the two groups (p=0.424), but there was a trend towards lower levels of self-confidence to maintain balance in ACRO patients compared with NFA patients (75% (8.33-100% vs90% (28.33-100%, p=0. 051). Conclusion ACRO patients showed significantly lower functionality of upper extremities and hips and a trend to greater functional impairment in the knee joints. Even though the number of falls was not different between the two groups, we did note a trend towards reduced levels of self-confidence to maintain balance in ACRO patients. Presentation: No date and time listed

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)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Endocrine Society→Same topicPituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments→French-language works237,207→