Prediction of damage trajectories in systemic sclerosis using group-based trajectory modelling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Damage accrual in SSc can be tracked using the Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium Damage Index (DI). Our goal was to develop a prediction model for damage accrual in SSc patients with early disease. METHODS: Using patients with <2 years disease duration from Canada and Australia as a derivation cohort, and from the Netherlands as a validation cohort, we used group-based trajectory modelling (GBTM) to determine 'good' and 'bad' latent damage trajectories. We developed a prediction model from this analysis and applied it to patients from derivation and validation cohorts. We plotted the actual DI trajectories of the patients predicted to be in 'good' or 'bad' groups. RESULTS: We found that the actual trajectories of damage accumulation for lcSSc and dcSSc were very different, so we studied each subset separately. GBTM found two distinct trajectories in lcSSc and three in dcSSc. We collapsed the two worse trajectories in the dcSSc into one group and developed a prediction model for inclusion in either 'good' or 'bad' trajectories. The performance of models using only baseline DI and sex was excellent with ROC AUC of 0.9313 for lcSSc and 0.9027 for dcSSc. Using this model, we determined whether patients would fall into 'good' or 'bad' trajectory groups and then plotted their actual trajectories which showed clear differences between the predicted 'good' and 'bad' cases in both derivation and validation cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: A simple model using only cutaneous subset, baseline DI and sex can predict damage accumulation in early SSc.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".