A systematic review of pharmacological therapies and their effectiveness on health-related quality of life outcomes in patients with juvenile-onset systemic lupus erythematosus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Juvenile-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (JSLE) presents with an aggressive course and high morbidity associated with disease and treatment. JSLE patients have a poorer health-related quality of life (HRQoL) when compared with age-matched patients with other rheumatologic disorders. We aim to summarize the impact of current pharmacological therapies on the HRQoL of JSLE patients. Search strategies were developed across seven databases. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing interventions to standard therapy, placebo or pre-post cohort comparisons for more than 4 weeks were included. The outcome included self-reported scales compared at baseline and a therapeutic time point. Risk of bias was evaluated by using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. A total of 2812 articles were narrowed down to 309 for full-text screening. Four RCTs and one prospective cohort study, with a total of 634 JSLE patients, met the inclusion criteria. Four of the studies had a controlled intervention plus standard therapy compared with standard therapy alone or placebo. Multiple indices were used to evaluate HRQoL. These included the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory, Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire, Simple Measure of Impact of Lupus Erythematosus in Youngsters tool, Kids Fatigue Severity Scale and Child Depression Inventory. A single study reported a significant improvement while remaining studies reported no difference or failed to report the statistical analysis. Although HRQoL is significantly impaired in JSLE, evidence regarding its improvement is limited due to the small number of eligible studies, heterogeneity in scales, and HRQoL domains. A universal HRQoL questionnaire for JSLE needs to be established and used in both the research and clinical setting. All studies should adhere to reporting guidelines.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".