Evaluation of Patient and Physician Assessments of Gastrointestinal Disease Activity in Systemic Sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To assess whether patient and physician global assessment of gastrointestinal tract (GIT) disease in systemic sclerosis (SSc) are associated with a meaningful change in disease status. Methods One hundred forty-three participants from the Australian Scleroderma Cohort Study were recruited to this study. Using logistic regression analysis, we evaluated the relationship between patient-reported and physician-assessed GIT disease status and symptoms, measures of health-related quality of life (36-item Short Form Health Survey [SF-36]) and GIT disease severity, measured by the Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium UCLA Gastrointestinal Tract 2.0 (GIT 2.0) score. Results Patient-reported worsening of GIT symptoms in the month preceding assessment was significantly associated with more severe GIT disease (odds ratio [OR] 6.14,P< 0.01) and progressive worsening GIT disease severity as measured by the GIT 2.0 score (OR 45.98,P< 0.01). The new onset of reflux was the only specific symptom associated with patient-reported GIT disease activity (OR 2.98,P= 0.04). Physician-assessed GIT disease activity was not significantly associated with higher GIT 2.0 scores or increasing severity of disease. Patient-reported and physician-assessed GIT activity was not associated with SF-36 scores. Conclusion In the absence of objective measures of GIT disease activity in SSc, patient-reported symptoms of GIT disease could be used to indicate disease activity and should merit consideration for inclusion in a multisystem disease activity index.
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 | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".