MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388760045 · doi:10.3233/jnd-230176

Moving Beyond the 2018 Minimum International Care Considerations for Osteoporosis Management in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD): Meeting Report from the 3rd International Muscle-Bone Interactions Meeting 7th and 14th November 2022

2023· article· en· W4388760045 on OpenAlexaff
Kim Phung, Nicola Crabtree, Anne M. Connolly, Pat Furlong, Eric P. Hoffman, Stefan A. Jackowski, Soher Nagi Jayash, Johnson Alex, Khaldoun Koujok, Craig F. Munns, E. Niks, Frank Rauch, Rachel Schrader, Elizabeth Vroom, David R. Weber, Brenda Wong, Michela Guglieri, Leanne M. Ward, Sze Choong Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuromuscular Diseases · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle Physiology and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaShriners Hospitals for Children - CanadaChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDuchenne muscular dystrophyMedicineOsteoporosisMuscular dystrophyPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Individuals living with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) are at significant risk of bone fragility due to osteoporosis, with the most potent drivers of fragility fractures in this context stemming from the aggressive myopathy and long term oral glucocorticoid therapy. Young people with DMD have a high fracture burden, with reported total and vertebral fracture rates that are four [1, 2] and 535 times [1] higher than those of healthy growing boys, respectively. Vertebral fractures can occur as early as six months following daily glucocorticoid initiation [3]. Up to 75% of young people with DMD sustain at least one fracture after eight years of glucocorticoid therapy [4]. Fractures in DMD can lead to devastating outcomes, including steeper rates of functional decline, premature and permanent loss of ambulation, chronic pain, and even death from fat embolism syndrome or adrenal crisis following long bone fractures [2, 5–8]. The potential for serious consequences and medical complications linked to fractures has driven efforts to develop effective guidelines for timely bone health surveillance and treatment with more recent efforts to develop fracture prevention strategies. To guide clinicians in the management of DMD and its related co-morbidities (including skeletal health), the first internationally-endorsed, minimum standards of care were published in 2010 under the moniker “Clinical Care Considerations” [9, 10]. This document recommends that osteoporosis monitoring include spine x-rays if back pain or kyphosis is present, followed by initiation of intravenous bisphosphonate therapy if vertebral fractures are identified [10]. In the years following the inaugural 2010 Clinical Care Considerations, studies were published showing that vertebral fractures, a key manifestation of bone fragility among children and adults living with glucorticoid-treated chronic conditions, were frequently asymptomatic, necessitating routine surveillance for early detection [3, 11]. It was also better appreciated that even a single long bone fracture can signal osteoporosis in a persistently high-risk setting such as DMD, and prompt initiation of bone protection therapy is important. With this new knowledge, the latest international, minimum standards of clinical care for DMD published in 2018, known as Care Considerations [12–14], recommended routine, standardized spine imaging for early detection of vertebral fractures, combined with more timely bone-targeted (bisphosphonate) intervention in the presence of vertebral or low trauma long bone fractures [12]. At the same time, the ever-changing therapeutic landscape for the treatment of the underlying condition calls for ongoing examination of the intimate relationship between muscle and bone development in DMD, including the effect of different DMD treatment approaches on the skeletal and endocrine systems. The overall goal of such focus is to harvest discussions about optimal management that will foster bone strength and prevent fractures in this high-risk setting across all underlying disease-targeted treatment paradigms for people with DMD.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0100.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.009

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neuromuscular DiseasesSame topicMuscle Physiology and DisordersFrench-language works237,207