A comparison between childhood and adult onset systemic lupus erythematosus adjusted for ethnicity from the 1000 Canadian Faces of Lupus Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Childhood-onset SLE (cSLE) manifests differently than adult-onset SLE (aSLE). This study determined whether ethnic differences contribute to the differences in clinical presentation between the two groups. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used data from a multi-centred registry from eight adult and four paediatric Canadian centres gathered at study entry. We compared the frequency of clinical manifestations and autoantibodies between aSLE and cSLE. For those with a significant difference, a multivariable logistic regression was performed, adjusting for ethnicity, SLE onset (cSLE vs aSLE), disease duration and centre. Disease activity and damage between aSLE and cSLE were compared after stratifying by disease duration. RESULTS: Of 552 aSLE subjects, 502 (90.9%) were female and 381 (69.0%) were Caucasian. Mean age at diagnosis was 37.0 ± 13.6 years and disease duration 10.9 ± 9.6 years. Of 276 cSLE subjects, 231 (83.7%) were female and 101 (36.6%) were Caucasian. Mean age at diagnosis was 12.7 ± 3.3 years and disease duration 5.6 ± 8.2 years. In multivariable regression analysis, aSLE was associated with decreased odds of having a neurologic disorder (odds ratio = 0.49) and increased odds of having aCL antibodies (odds ratio = 1.85). Disease activity and damage accrual scores were higher in aSLE than cSLE within the same disease duration strata, although the differences were not clinically significant. Ethnicity was not associated with any differences in clinical manifestations or autoantibody frequency between aSLE and cSLE. CONCLUSIONS: Although a crude comparison of aSLE and cSLE yielded several differences in clinical symptoms and autoantibodies, this difference was not attributable to ethnic differences between aSLE and cSLE.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".