MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4400655127 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.2024-0515

Composite Outcome Measures for Psoriatic Arthritis: OMERACT and 3 and 4 Visual Analog Scale Progress in 2023

2024· article· en· W4400655127 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ying Ying Leung, Dafna D. Gladman, Ana‐Maria Orbai, William Tillett

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilGilead SciencesAmgenPfizerEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsPsoriatic arthritisMedicineVisual analogue scaleConstruct validityFace validityPhysical therapyRheumatologyPsoriasisInternal medicineRating scaleArthritisPsychometricsClinical psychologyDermatologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) psoriatic arthritis (PsA) working group provided updates at the GRAPPA 2023 annual meeting on its work to evaluate composite outcome measures for PsA. An ongoing systematic literature review is in progress to evaluate psychometric measurement properties using the OMERACT filter 2.2 for a list of candidate composite outcome measures, which include minimal disease activity (MDA), Disease Activity for Psoriatic Arthritis (DAPSA), American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response criteria, Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score (PASDAS), Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index (CPDAI), 3 visual analog scale (3VAS), and 4VAS. The performance of the 3VAS and 4VAS in clinical practice and a synthesis of new data were presented, including estimates for minimal clinically important differences and thresholds of meaning, discrimination and construct validity, and longitudinal construct validity. Numeric rating scale (NRS) versions of the VAS have also been tested. Performance characteristics and psychometric properties are similar to the ASSESS study, a UK multicenter study, indicating that the VAS scales may be feasible tools for routine clinical care with a preference for the 4VAS because of superior face validity and clinical utility.

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)0.037
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0370.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.305 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Rheumatology→Same topicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments→French-language works237,207→