Clinical Relevance of Axial Radiographic Damage in Axial Spondyloarthritis: Evaluation of Functional Consequences by an Objective Electronic Device
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is associated with decreased function and mobility of patients as a result of inflammation and radiographic damage. The Epionics SPINE device (ES), an electronic device that objectively measures spinal mobility, including range of motion (RoM) and speed (ie, range of kinematics [RoK]) of movement, has been clinically validated in axSpA. We investigated the performance of the ES relative to radiographic damage in the axial skeleton of patients with axSpA. Methods A total of 103 patients with axSpA, 31 with nonradiographic axSpA (nr-axSpA) and 72 with radiographic axSpA (r-axSpA), were consecutively examined. Conventional radiographs of the spine (including presence, number, and location of syndesmophytes) and the sacroiliac joints (SIJs; rated by the modified New York criteria) were analyzed with the ES. Function and mobility were assessed using analyses of covariance and Spearman correlation. Results The number of syndesmophytes correlated positively with Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index scores (r0.38,P= 0.02) and correlated negatively with chest expansion (r−0.39,P= 0.02) and ES measurements (−0.53 ≤r≤ −0.34, allP< 0.03), except for RoM and RoK regarding rotation and RoK for extension of the lumbar and thoracic spines. In the radiographic evaluation of the SIJs, the extent of damage correlated negatively with ES scores and metric measurements (−0.49 ≤r≤ −0.33, allP< 0.001). Patients with r-axSpA, as compared to those with nr-axSpA, showed significantly worse ES scores for RoM, RoK, and chest expansion. Conclusion The ES scores, in accordance with mobility measurements, correlated well with the presence and extent of radiographic damage in the spine and the SIJs. As expected, patients with r-axSpA had more severe impairments than those with nr-axSpA.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".