Bibliographic record
Abstract
Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is still a disease with significant mortality. Although 5 yr after diagnosis 92% of patients are alive, the prognosis falls to 82% survival at 10 yr, 76% at 15 yr and only 68% at 20 yr in Toronto [1]. There has been improvement in survival, with the standardized mortality ratio in patients recruited to the Toronto cohort in 1970–1977 being 10.1 (95% CI 6.5–15.0), compared with 3.3 (95% CI 1.8–5.7) for those recruited between 1986 and 1994 [2]. Data from other centres in the USA and Europe has been similar. Studies published around 1980 found that about 80% of patients survived 5 yr and about 60% of patients survived 10 yr. More recent studies have shown that 5‐yr survival is now nearer 90–95% and that 70–85% of patients survive 10 yr [3]. In most studies, patients with renal involvement have had a poorer prognosis than those without renal disease. Nevertheless, survival has shown improvement in those with renal disease presenting to a UK centre between 1976 and 1986 (81% 10‐yr survival), compared with those presenting between 1963 and 1975 (56% 10‐yr survival) [4].
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".