MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109234375 · doi:10.1191/0961203304lu1099oa

Evaluation of systemic lupus erythematosus activity during pregnancy

2004· article· en· W2109234375 on OpenAlexaff
Guillermo Ruiz‐Irastorza, Munther A. Khamashta

Bibliographic record

VenueLupus · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsWomen's Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancySystemic lupus erythematosusAntiphospholipid syndromeLupus erythematosusObstetricsAutoimmunityImmunologyInternal medicineDiseaseAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to our increasing knowledge on the pathophysiological basis of autoimmunity and the development of combined medical-obstetric clinics, pregnancy is becoming common among women with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). However, whether lupus worsens during pregnancy continues to be a controversial issue. SLE assessment during pregnancy is sometimes difficult due to physiological changes during this period, and common tools for measuring lupus activity during pregnancy were not available until recently. Several lupus activity scales in common use have been adapted for pregnancy [systemic lupus erythematosus in pregnancy activity index (SLEPDAI), modified lupus activity measurement (m-SLAM) and lupus activity index in pregnancy (LAI-P)]. All of them take into account the influence of pregnancy on clinical manifestation and common biochemical tests. LAI-P also accounts for specific manifestations of antiphospholipid syndrome in order not to score them as due to SLE activity. LAI-P has recently been validated for use in SLE pregnancy and could be used in future studies. However, daily assessment and management of individual pregnant women with lupus still relies on the clinical skills of attending physicians.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.545
Threshold uncertainty score0.862

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations55
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLupusSame topicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus ResearchFrench-language works237,207