MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4362668939 · doi:10.3390/jcm12072729

Determination of Relative Weightings for Sacroiliac Joint Pathologies in the OMERACT Juvenile Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Imaging Sacroiliac Joint Score

2023· article· en· W4362668939 on OpenAlexafffund
Tarimobo M. Otobo, Mirkamal Tolend, Arthur B. Meyers, Iwona Sudoł‐Szopińska, Sayali Joshi, Jennifer Stimec, Nele Herregods, Jacob L. Jaremko, Shirley M. L. Tse, Nigil Haroon, Rahim Moineddin, Nikolay Tzaribachev, Simone Appenzeller, Michał Znajdek, Manuela Perez, Aloysius Ebi Ligha, Lennart Jans, Emilio J. Inarejos Clemente, Pamela F. Weiss, Olympia Papakonstantinou, Eva Kirkhus, Marion A. J. van Rossum, Dax G. Rumsey, John A. Carrino, Jonathan Akikusa, Philip G. Conaghan, Andréa S. Doria

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto Western HospitalUniversity of AlbertaSickKids Foundation
FundersLeeds Biomedical Research CentreHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoDepartment of Health and Social CareNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingSacroiliac jointRheumatologyEnthesitisArthritisRadiologyPhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to determine the relative weights (point value) of items of the juvenile idiopathic arthritis magnetic resonance imaging-sacroiliac joint scoring system (JAMRIS-SIJ). An adaptive multicriteria decision analysis was performed using the 1000Minds web application to determine the relative weights of the items in the JAMRIS-SIJ inflammation and damage domains. Experts in imaging and rheumatology independently completed a conjoint analysis survey (CAS) to determine the point value of the measurement items of the JAMRIS-SIJ. Each CAS survey question asked the expert to compare two hypothetical patient profiles, which were otherwise similar but different at two items at a time, and to select which item showed a more severe stage of inflammation or osteochondral damage. In addition, experts ranked 14 JAMRIS-SIJ grade only or image + grade patient vignettes while blinded to the CAS-derived weights. The validity of the weighted JAMRIS-SIJ was tested by comparing the expert CAS-weighted score and the image + grade ranking method. Seventeen experts completed the CAS (11 radiologists and 6 rheumatologists). Considering the point value for inflammation domain items, osteitis (24.7%) and bone marrow edema (24.3%) had higher group-averaged percentage weights compared to inflammation in erosion cavity (16.9%), joint space enhancement (13.1%), joint space fluid (9.1%), capsulitis (7.3%), and enthesitis (4.6%). Similarly, concerning the damage domain, ankylosis (41.3%) and erosion (25.1%) showed higher group-averaged weights compared to backfill (13.9%), sclerosis (10.7%), and fat metaplasia lesion (9.1%). The Spearman correlation coefficients of the CAS-weighted vignette order and unweighted JAMRIS-SIJ grade only order vignettes for all experts were 0.79 for inflammation and 0.80 for damage. The correlations of image vignettes among imaging experts to CAS were 0.75 for inflammation and 0.90 for damage. The multicriteria decision analysis identified differences in relative weights among the JAMRIS-SIJ measurement items. The determination of the relative weights provided expert-driven score scaling and face validity for the JAMRIS-SIJ, enabling the future evaluation of its longitudinal construct validity.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine→Same topicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments→French-language works237,207→