S877 Diagnosis of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Associated Peripheral Arthritis: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) associated peripheral spondyloarthritis (pSpA) negatively affects quality of life and remains poorly understood. Consequently, evidence-based disease definitions, diagnostic strategies and treatment algorithms are lacking. This systematic review aimed to summarize current approaches to diagnosis of IBD associated pSpA to facilitate the development and validation of patient reported outcomes and imaging indices specific to this condition. Methods: A literature search was conducted in collaboration with a medical librarian. Consensus or classification criteria, case series, cross sectional and cohort studies as well as randomized controlled trials related to diagnosis of IBD associated pSpA were included. Studies that incorporated patient data were required to meet additional inclusion criteria, including a confirmed diagnosis of IBD along with clinical or subclinical IBD associated pSpA. Results: A total of 40 studies were eligible for analysis. Ten studies proposed or validated screening tools, classification criteria, or consensus criteria. The majority of studies incorporated patient report of symptoms along with a physical exam. Symptoms included pain, swelling, morning stiffness and limitations in performing physical activities, while physical examination most commonly comprised evaluation by a rheumatologist for swollen/tender joints or entheses. A total of 27 studies assessed the role of laboratory tests (human leukocyte antigen-B27, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein) with no marker considered accurate enough to be used as a diagnostic tool. A subset of 14 studies assessed the role of imaging. The currently available data do not support imaging assessment as a robust diagnostic modality, but overall studies were insufficient to fully evaluate this issue. Due to the large heterogeneity in the available data a meta-analysis was not considered feasible. Conclusion: This systematic review indicates a lack of consistency in approaches to diagnosis of IBD associated pSpA. Until an evidence-based approach is established, the incorporation of classification criteria, Delphi consensus criteria, and physician assessment with a high index of suspicion for joint involvement in IBD should be utilized. We intend to pursue a multi-disciplinary approach to standardization of evaluation and diagnosis of IBD associated pSpA.
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 | 0.007 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".