Referral Patterns, Diagnosis, a Patients With Axial Results of an Inter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Recognition, diagnosis, and management of axial spondy-loarthritis (axial SpA) continue to advance. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to compare referrals, diagno-sis, and management of axial SpA in Western Europe (WE), North America (US and Canada), and the rest of world (RoW) in academic and community rheumatology practices and to identify areas for further education. Methods: Rheumatologists responded online to theMAXIMA (Manage-ment of Axial SpA International and Multicentric Approaches) survey. Questions pertained to referral, diagnosis, and management of axial SpA. Results: Rheumatologists (N = 809) from 56 countries completed the survey about patients with chronic back pain (≥3 months) starting before age 45 years. Responses from academic and community practice rheuma-tologists were generally similar. Most referrals were from primary care pro-viders. Symptom duration of 3 years or more at referral was reported more frequently by WE and RoW than US respondents. More WE and RoW ment of axial disease because of the lack of clinical evidence. Appropriate identification and referral of patients with symp-toms suggestive of axial SpA can facilitate earlier diagnosis ORIGINAL ARTICLEbe changed in any way or used commercially.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".