James F. Fries

Bio: James F. Fries is an academic researcher from Stanford University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Rheumatoid arthritis & Arthritis. The author has an hindex of 100, co-authored 369 publications receiving 83589 citations. Previous affiliations of James F. Fries include University of Saskatchewan & National Institutes of Health.

Detecting treatment effects in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: the advantage of longitudinal data.

Abstract: Assessment of therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis is important but difficult. We examined 4 different methods of analyzing pretreatment data and assessed the difference that each made in detecting a positive effect of intramuscular gold on the patient's overall disability. The methods were (1) calculating the arithmetic mean of prior data points, (2) taking the last data point pretreatment, (3) fitting a straight line to pretreatment points and (4) fitting the pretreatment points with a quadratic equation. After comparison with matched controls (not taking remittive agents) the most significant difference was found by fitting a straight line to pretreatment data

Frailty and Education in the Hispanic Health and Nutrition Examination Survey

Abstract: This study tests for the presence of education-frailty correla- tions among 1,176 Mexican Americans, 522 Cuban Americans, and 560 Puerto Ricans, 50 years and older, in the Hispanic Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Hispanics with the least schooling (less than 7 years) were found to have the highest frailty rates, and those with the most (more than 12 years of schooling) were found to have the lowest frailty rates. Similar, but somewhat weaker, correlations were discovered after a measure of self-efficacy was accounted for.

Aging Well: A Guide for Successful Seniors

Abstract: Find loads of the aging well a guide for successful seniors book catalogues in this site as the choice of you visiting this page. You can also join to the website book library that will show you numerous books from any types. Literature, science, politics, and many more catalogues are presented to offer you the best book to find. The book that really makes you feels satisfied. Or that's the book that will save you from your job deadline.

Aging, Frailty, and the Compression of Morbidity: Definite Progress

Abstract: Frailty, the loss of physiologic organ reserve with age, and chronic illness, which may accelerate the development of frailty in one or more than one body system, become the dominant determinants of ill-health in those who escape the hazards of early and mid-life. The Compression of Morbidity paradigm holds that if the average age at first infirmity, disability, or other morbidity is postponed, and if this postponement is greater than increases in life expectancy, then average cumulative lifetime morbidity will decrease, squeezed between a later onset and the time of death. The National Long-Term Care Survey, the National Health Interview Survey, and other data from the United States and some other developed countries now document declining disability trends beginning around 1982 and accelerating more recently. The decline in disability is about 2% per year, contrasted with a decline in mortality rates of about 1% a year, documenting compression of morbidity in the United States at the population level. Longitudinal studies now link good health risk status with long-term reductions in cumulative lifetime disability; those with few behavioral health risks have only one-fourth the disability of those who have more risk factors, and the onset of disability in those with good health habits is postponed from 7 to 12 years, far more than any increases in longevity. Randomized controlled trials of health enhancement programs in senior populations have shown a reduction in health risks, improved health status, and decreased medical care utilization. Health policy initiatives now being undertaken have the promise of increasing and consolidating health gains for seniors under the umbrella paradigm of the Compression of Morbidity.

The American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis.

Abstract: The revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were formulated from a computerized analysis of 262 contemporary, consecutively studied patients with RA and 262 control subjects with rheumatic diseases other than RA (non-RA). The new criteria are as follows: 1) morning stiffness in and around joints lasting at least 1 hour before maximal improvement; 2) soft tissue swelling (arthritis) of 3 or more joint areas observed by a physician; 3) swelling (arthritis) of the proximal interphalangeal, metacarpophalangeal, or wrist joints; 4) symmetric swelling (arthritis); 5) rheumatoid nodules; 6) the presence of rheumatoid factor; and 7) radiographic erosions and/or periarticular osteopenia in hand and/or wrist joints. Criteria 1 through 4 must have been present for at least 6 weeks. Rheumatoid arthritis is defined by the presence of 4 or more criteria, and no further qualifications (classic, definite, or probable) or list of exclusions are required. In addition, a "classification tree" schema is presented which performs equally as well as the traditional (4 of 7) format. The new criteria demonstrated 91-94% sensitivity and 89% specificity for RA when compared with non-RA rheumatic disease control subjects.

The 1982 revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus

Abstract: The 1971 preliminary criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) were revised and updated to incorporate new immunologic knowledge and improve disease classification. The 1982 revised criteria include fluorescence antinuclear antibody and antibody to native DNA and Sm antigen. Some criteria involving the same organ systems were aggregated into single criteria. Raynaud's phenomenon and alopecia were not included in the 1982 revised criteria because of low sensitivity and specificity. The new criteria were 96% sensitive and 96% specific when tested with SLE and control patient data gathered from 18 participating clinics. When compared with the 1971 criteria, the 1982 revised criteria showed gains in sensitivity and specificity.

Updating the American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus.

Abstract: In 1982, the Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)published revised criteria for the classification of systemiclupus erythematosus (SLE) (1). During the ensuing decade several investigators, including Drs. Graham Hughes and Donato Alarcon-Segovia, among others, have described the presence and clinical associations or antiphospholipid antibodies in patients with SLE, as well as the occurrence of theprimary antiphospholipid syndrome (2-5). In 1992, Piette and colleagues suggested that the ACR revised criteria be reevaluated in light of the above discoveries (6).

The American College of Rheumatology 1990 Criteria for the Classification of Fibromyalgia. Report of the Multicenter Criteria Committee.

Abstract: To develop criteria for the classification of fibromyalgia, we studied 558 consecutive patients: 293 patients with fibromyalgia and 265 control patients. Interviews and examinations were performed by trained, blinded assessors. Control patients for the group with primary fibromyalgia were matched for age and sex, and limited to patients with disorders that could be confused with primary fibromyalgia. Control patients for the group with secondary-concomitant fibromyalgia were matched for age, sex, and concomitant rheumatic disorders. Widespread pain (axial plus upper and lower segment plus left- and right-sided pain) was found in 97.6% of all patients with fibromyalgia and in 69.1% of all control patients. The combination of widespread pain and mild or greater tenderness in greater than or equal to 11 of 18 tender point sites yielded a sensitivity of 88.4% and a specificity of 81.1%. Primary fibromyalgia patients and secondary-concomitant fibromyalgia patients did not differ statistically in any major study variable, and the criteria performed equally well in patients with and those without concomitant rheumatic conditions. The newly proposed criteria for the classification of fibromyalgia are 1) widespread pain in combination with 2) tenderness at 11 or more of the 18 specific tender point sites. No exclusions are made for the presence of concomitant radiographic or laboratory abnormalities. At the diagnostic or classification level, the distinction between primary fibromyalgia and secondary-concomitant fibromyalgia (as defined in the text) is abandoned.