Defining criteria for disease activity states in juvenile dermatomyositis based on the Juvenile Dermatomyositis Activity Index.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate the cut-offs in the Juvenile DermatoMyositis Activity Index (JDMAI) to distinguish the states of inactive disease (ID), low disease activity (LDA), moderate disease activity (MDA) and high disease activity (HDA) in children with juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM). METHODS: For cut-off definition, data from 139 patients included in a randomised clinical trial were used. Among the six versions of the JDMAI, JDMA1 (score range 0-40) and JDMAI2 (score range 0-39) were selected. Optimal cut-offs were determined against external criteria by calculating different percentiles of score distribution and through receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. External criteria included the modified Pediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organization (PRINTO) criteria for clinically ID in JDM (for ID) and PRINTO levels of improvement in the clinical trial (for LDA and HDA). MDA cut-offs were set at the score interval between LDA and HDA cut-offs. Cut-off validation was conducted by assessing construct and discriminative ability in two cohorts including a total of 488 JDM patients. RESULTS: The calculated JDMAI1 cut-offs were ≤2.4 for ID, ≤6.6 for LDA, 6.7-11 for MDA and >11 for HDA. The calculated JDMAI2 cut-offs were ≤5.2 for ID, ≤8.5 for LDA, 8.6-11.3 for MDA and >11.3 for HDA. The cut-offs discriminated strongly among disease activity states defined subjectively by caring physicians and parents, parents' satisfaction or non-satisfaction with illness outcome, levels of pain, fatigue, physical functional impairment and physical well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Both JDMAI1 and JDMAI2 cut-offs revealed good metrologic properties in validation analyses and are, therefore, suited for application in clinical practice and research.

The method used to set the pass mark in an objective structured clinical examination defines the performance of candidates for certification as rheumatologists. / El método para establecer el punto de corte en el examen clínico objetivo estructurado define el desempeño de los candidatos a la certificación como reumatólogo.

BACKGROUND: The Mexican Accreditation Council for Rheumatology certifies trainees (TR) on an annual basis using both a multiple-choice question (MCQ) test and an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). For 2013 and 2014, the OSCE pass mark (PM) was set by criterion referencing as ≥6 (CPM), whereas overall rating of borderline performance method (BPM) was added for 2015 and 2016 accreditations. We compared OSCE TR performance according to CPM and BPM, and examined whether correlations between MCQ and OSCE were affected by PM. METHODS: Forty-three (2015) and 37 (2016) candidates underwent both tests. Altogether, OSCE were integrated by 15 validated stations; one evaluator per station scored TR performance according to a station-tailored check-list and a Likert scale (fail, borderline, above range) of overall performance. A composite OSCE score was derived for each candidate. Appropriate statistics were used. RESULTS: Mean (±standard derivation [SD]) MCQ test scores were 6.6±0.6 (2015) and 6.4±0.6 (2016) with 5 candidates receiving a failing score each year. Mean (±SD) OSCE scores were 7.4±0.6 (2015) and 7.3±0.6 (2016); no candidate received a failing CPM score in either 2015 or 2016 OSCE, although 21 (49%) and 19 (51%) TR, respectively, received a failing BPM score (calculated as 7.3 and 7.4, respectively). Stations for BPM ranged from 4.5 to 9.5; overall, candidates showed better performance in CPM. In all, MCQ correlated with composite OSCE, r=0.67 (2015) and r=0.53 (2016); P≤.001. Trainees with a passing BPM score in OSCE had higher MCQ scores than those with a failing score. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, OSCE-PM selection impacted candidates' performance but had a limited affect on correlation between clinical and practical examinations.