MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404873431 · doi:10.1136/ard-2024-226446

Expert consensus recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic non-bacterial osteitis (CNO) in adults

2025· review· en· W4404873431 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the Rheumatic Diseases · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteomyelitis and Bone Disorders Research
Canadian institutionsAlberta Bone and Joint Health Institute
FundersNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekUniversiteit Leiden
KeywordsMedicineOsteitisDermatologyMEDLINEConsensus conferenceIntensive care medicineSurgeryOsteomyelitisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is considerable practice variation in labelling, diagnosis and treatment of adults with sterile bone inflammation. We developed a expert consensus recommendations on the disease definition, diagnosis and treatment of this rare condition. METHODS: Systematic literature review and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations-based appraisal of evidence, two Delphi surveys and three digital and in-person consensus meetings with a multidisciplinary expert panel and patient representatives. RESULTS: A consensus disease definition was developed and the term 'chronic non-bacterial osteitis' (CNO) is proposed to describe adults with sterile bone inflammation. For initial imaging evaluation of adults with suspected CNO, the panel recommends MRI or otherwise CT combined with nuclear imaging. Whole-body imaging at initial evaluation can be considered for diagnostic and prognostic purposes. Suggested first-line treatment in adults with active CNO includes non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs/cyclooxygenase 2-inhibitors. Second-line treatment preferably consists of intravenous bisphosphonates, and otherwise tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors. Choice between them should be individualised, considering the presence of additional inflammatory features. The panel further discusses outcome measures, follow-up and management of adverse events and complications. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES: These expert consensus recommendations are intended to support healthcare professionals worldwide in their care for adults with CNO. They also lay the groundwork for establishing international patient registries, translational research lines and multicentre trials, all of which are urgently required.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.129
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.302 · 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