Incidence and prevalence of adult systemic lupus erythematosus in a large US managed-care population
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to determine the incidence and prevalence of adult systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in a large US managed-care population. METHODS: Subject inclusion in the incidence cohort required a medical claim with an SLE diagnosis and a service date from 2003 to 2008 that satisfied the following criteria: 1) ≥18 years on service date; 2) continuously enrolled for 24 months before and 12 months after service date; 3) in the 12 months after service date, ≥ one inpatient claim or ≥ two office or ER visits with an SLE diagnosis; 4) no SLE diagnosis 24 months prior to service date; and 5) no SLE medications 12 months prior to service date. Prevalence cohort subjects were identified using a similar algorithm and were not required to satisfy criteria 4) and 5). RESULTS: A total of 1,557 subjects were included in the incidence cohort, and 15,396 were included in the prevalence cohort. The overall age- and gender-adjusted SLE incidence rate (2003-2008) was 7.22 cases per 100,000 person-years. The annual prevalence of SLE (per 100,000 individuals) varied from 81.07 in 2003 to 102.94 in 2008. CONCLUSION: The SLE incidence in this large managed-care plan with geographic diversity was slightly higher than previous estimates, and the prevalence was within the range of previous estimates.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it