Application and performance of disease activity indices proposed for patients with systemic sclerosis in an international cohort of patients with juvenile systemic sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Juvenile systemic sclerosis is a rare childhood disease. Three disease activity indices have been published for adult patients with systemic sclerosis: the European Scleroderma Study Group Index, a modified version of the European Scleroderma Study Group Index and the revised European Scleroderma Trials and Research index. The objective of this study was to determine the feasibility and performance of the three disease activity indices in a prospectively followed cohort of patients with juvenile systemic sclerosis. Methods: The analysis cohort was selected from the prospective international inception cohort enrolling juvenile systemic sclerosis patients. The correlation of the disease activity indices with the physicians' and the patients' global assessment of disease activity was determined. The disease activity indices were compared between patients with active and inactive disease. Sensitivity to change between 6- and 12-month follow-up was investigated by mixed models. Results: Eighty percent of the 70 patients had a diffuse cutaneous subtype. The revised European Scleroderma Trials and Research index was highly correlated with the physician-reported global disease activity/parents-reported global disease activity (r = 0.74/0.64), followed by the European Scleroderma Study Group activity index (r = 0.61/0.55) and the modified version of the European Scleroderma Study Group activity index (r = 0.51/0.43). The disease activity indices significantly differed between active and inactive patients. The disease activity indices showed sensitivity to change between 6- and 12-month follow-up among patients who improved or worsened according to the physician-reported global disease activity and the parents-reported global disease activity. Conclusion: Overall, no disease activity score is superior to the other, and all three scores have limitations in the application in juvenile systemic sclerosis patients. Furthermore, research on the concept of disease activity and suitable scores to measure disease activity in patients with juvenile systemic sclerosis is necessary in future.
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 | 0.011 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".