Longitudinal evaluation of major salivary gland functioning in Sjögren's disease patients in a prospective standard-of-care cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate changes in major salivary gland functioning over time using salivary gland ultrasonography (SGUS), salivary flow measurements (sialometry), and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients diagnosed with primary Sjögren's disease (SjD). METHODS: Consecutive outpatients from the ongoing prospective REgistry of Sjögren Syndrome LongiTudinal (RESULT) cohort, all fulfilling the ACR-EULAR classification criteria for SjD, were included. SGUS images assessed with the Hocevar and OMERACT scoring system, unstimulated and stimulated whole saliva (UWS/SWS), unstimulated and stimulated submandibular/sublingual saliva (uSMSLS/sSMSLS) and parotid saliva, EULAR Sjögren's Syndrome Patient Reported Index (ESSPRI) general dryness, oral dryness, and Xerostomia Inventory were assessed at baseline (BL), 2-year (Y2) and 5-year (Y5) follow-up. RESULTS: In total, BL and Y2 data were available for 253 patients and 75 patients had already reached Y5. At group level, SGUS Hocevar (i.e., mean±SD: 22±10 at BL, 22±10 at Y2 and 23±10 at Y5), OMERACT scores, UWS, SWS and PROMs remained stable over time (all p>0.05). Slightly decreased uSMSLS (p=0.025) and sSMSLS (p=0.004) were observed at Y5. At individual patient level, a similar proportion showed an increase or decrease of ≥25% for Hocevar, UWS and SWS. At baseline, poor associations were observed between SGUS and PROMs and fair associations between sialometry and PROMs. Over time, changes in objective assessments did not correlate with changes in PROMs. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, major salivary gland functioning assessed with SGUS, sialometry and PROMs did not change significantly up to 5 years of follow-up in a standard-of-care cohort of SjD patients from daily clinical practice.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".