Comparison of the ASAS Health Index in patients classified as radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) or non-radiographic axSpA in the ASAS Health Index international validation study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine if there were differences in the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society Health Index (ASAS HI) scores between patients classified as radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (r-axSpA) and non-radiographic axSpA (nr-axSpA), and to identify factors associated with higher ASAS HI scores in both disease phenotypes. METHODS: This study was an ancillary analysis of the ASAS HI international validation project performed in 23 countries. Patients were included if they were ≥18 years of age and diagnosed with axSpA. Univariable and multivariable analysis were performed to determine if ASAS HI scores differed between the axSpA phenotypes, and to identify other variables associated with ASAS HI scores. We also tested for potential interactions between the axSpA phenotype and significant variables identified through the multivariable regression. RESULTS: A total of 976 patients were included, with 703 having r-axSpA and 273 nr-axSpA. Patients with r-axSpA reported higher (worse) ASAS HI scores compared with those with nr-axSpA (6.8 (4.4) vs 6.0 (4.0), p=0.02), but the axSpA phenotype was not associated with ASAS HI scores in the multivariable regression (β: -0.19, 95% CI: -0.56 to 0.19). Female gender, having worse physical function (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index), disease activity (Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score) and anxiety and depressive symptoms (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) were associated with higher ASAS HI scores. No interactions were found to be significant. CONCLUSION: Overall health and functioning are similarly affected in patients with r-axSpA and nr-axSpA. Female patients, having worse physical function, disease activity, anxiety and depressive symptoms were independently associated with higher ASAS HI scores.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".