Quality of life over time in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether quality of life in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) measured by the Short Form 36 (SF-36) changes over time and which patient- and disease-related factors influence such change. METHODS: SLE patients who had > or =6 SF-36 evaluations during followup were identified from a database. Outcomes were slopes of scores of the 8 SF-36 domains as well as the physical and mental component scores. Based on the direction of the slope, patients were designated as unchanged, improved, or worsened. Linear regression models were used to test the contribution of risk factors to slopes. Nonparametric tests were used to evaluate risk factors between patterns of clinical change. RESULTS: A total of 146 patients had > or =6 SF-36 evaluations in 1,047 visits over a mean +/- SD period of 8.2 +/- 1.1 years. During the interval, the majority of patients showed no change in the SF-36 domains and only a small minority demonstrated improvement. Physical and mental component scores were unchanged in 84.3% and 87.7% of patients whereas 4.1% and 7.5% improved, respectively. According to slopes of the domains and summary scores, only physical functioning demonstrated a significant decrease over time. There were no lupus disease features associated with decline in physical functioning except for the presence of fibromyalgia. CONCLUSION: The SF-36 in SLE patients with established disease changed little over an 8-year period. Changes in the SF-36 were not affected by disease activity, steroids, or damage accumulation during the interval, but were affected by the presence of fibromyalgia.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".