Isolated pyuria in systemic lupus erythematosus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to assess isolated pyuria in an unselected systemic lupus erythematosus sample, and to determine factors potentially associated with this manifestation. We studied patients followed in our lupus clinic, defining isolated pyuria as more than 10 white blood cells per high power field in the absence of hematuria, proteinuria, casts, or bacteriuria. We assessed the effects of various demographic and clinical factors on the occurrence of isolated pyuria, using univariate logistic regression analyses. We also performed multivariate models which included sex, age, race/ethnicity, systemic lupus erythematosus duration, non-renal systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity, systemic lupus erythematosus damage, number of non-renal and renal American College of Rheumatology criteria ever present, pre-existing hypertension, and current drug exposures. Of 264 subjects, 66 were excluded (43 had bacteriuria or a contaminated urine culture and 23 had no concomitant urine culture); 27 of the remaining 198 (13.6%) had isolated pyuria. Sixteen of 27 patients with sterile pyuria had previous American College of Rheumatology criteria for renal involvement (hematuria, casts, and/or proteinuria) compared to 62/171 patients without sterile pyuria (unadjusted odds ratio = 2.55; 95% confidence interval = 1.11-5.85). Our univariate analyses also suggested a trend towards higher non-renal disease activity in patients with isolated pyuria. Independent associations were not evident in adjusted analyses. Isolated pyuria was observed in a significant number of our systemic lupus erythematosus sample. Although the differential diagnosis for isolated pyuria is broad, this manifestation may be correlated with lupus activity even in the absence of hematuria or proteinuria. Lupus (2010) 19, 793-796.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".