Additional file 8 of Observed efficacy and clinically important improvements in participants with osteoarthritis treated with subcutaneous tanezumab: results from a 56-week randomized NSAID-controlled study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Additional file 8: Supplementary Fig. 1. The proportion of participants with a clinically important improvement. Panel A shows the proportion of participants achieving MCII at Weeks 16 and 56. MCII was defined as improvements from baseline in average pain in the index joint of ≥1.99 (knee) or ≥ 1.53 (hip), in WOMAC Physical Function of ≥ 0.91 (knee) or ≥ 0.79 (hip), and in PGA-OA of ≥ 1 point/category. Panel B shows the proportion of participants achieving a sustained MCII response from Weeks 4 through 16. Panel C shows the proportion of participants achieving PASS at Weeks 16 and 56. PASS was defined as an average pain score in the index joint of ≤ 3.23 (knee) or ≤ 3.50 (hip), a WOMAC Physical Function score of ≤ 3.10 (knee) or ≤ 3.44 (hip), and a PGA-OA score of “good” or “very good”. Panel D shows the proportion of participants achieving a sustained PASS response from Weeks 4 through 16. Proportions shown above each bar are rounded to the nearest percent. The proportions of participants meeting specified response criteria were analyzed using logistic regression analyses. *Unadjusted p ≤ 0.05 versus NSAID. MCII Minimum Clinically Important Improvement, PASS Patient Acceptable Symptom State, PGA-OA Patient’s Global Assessment of osteoarthritis, WOMAC Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index.
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 | 0.003 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.784 | 0.052 |
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".