Relationship between tendon elastography and clinical and ultrasound enthesitis scores in patients with psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: To determine the existence of a correlation between the elastographic study of the patellar and Achilles tendons and the enthesis evaluation in patients with psoriasis with or without psoriatic arthritis. Methods: Observational, cross-sectional study. Patients with psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis and healthy controls were included. The elastography results of the patellar and Achilles tendons of the non-dominant leg of the three groups were compared and tested for correlation with the Madrid Sonographic Enthesis Index (MASEI) score, as well as an entheses clinical evaluation score [Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC)]. Results: Forty-eight patients were included, 24 with psoriasis and 24 with psoriatic arthritis, as well as 48 healthy controls. Patients with psoriatic arthritis had a higher clinical enthesitis score than patients with psoriasis (8.0 vs. 1.0, P < 0.001). The mean (standard deviation) or median (25–75 percentile) of control subjects patellar and Achilles’ tendon stiffness, 127.8 kPa (18.5 kPa) and 198.0 kPa (183.2–212.0 kPa) were significantly higher than observed in patients with psoriatic arthritis, 119.2 kPa (19.7 kPa) and 184.8 kPa (175.5–193.9 kPa; P < 0.001 and P = 0.018, respectively). A strong inverse correlation between MASEI score and the patellar and Achilles’ tendon stiffness was also detected (Spearman’s Rho coefficient of –0.813 and –0.941, respectively). Conclusions: Patients with psoriatic arthritis present less stiffness in those load-bearing tendons than healthy controls. There is an inverse correlation between the enthesis involvement demonstrated by ultrasound and the elastography of these tendons. Tendon elastography can be considered a useful quantitative tool in assessing patients with psoriatic disease.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".