Racial Differences in Patient-provider Communication, Patient Self-efficacy, and Their Associations With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus–related Damage: A Cross-sectional Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Despite significant racial disparities in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) outcomes, few studies have examined how disparities may be perpetuated in clinical encounters. We aimed to explore associations between areas of clinical encounters - patient-provider communication and patient self-efficacy - with SLE-related damage, in order to identify potential areas for intervention to reduce SLE outcome disparities. METHODS: We collected cross-sectional data from a tertiary SLE clinic including patient-provider communication, general self-efficacy, self-efficacy for managing medications and treatments, patient-reported health status, and clinical information. We compared racial groups and used logistic regression to assess race-stratified association of patient-provider communication and patient self-efficacy with having SLE-related damage. RESULTS: Among 121 patients (37% White, 63% African American), African Americans were younger, more likely to be on Medicaid, and less likely to be college educated, married, or living with a partner or spouse. African Americans reported less fatigue and better social function, took more complex SLE medication regimens, had lower fibromyalgia (FM) scores, and had higher SLE disease activity and SLE-related damage scores. African Americans reported similar self-efficacy compared to White patients, but they reported more hurried communication with providers, which was reflected in their perception that providers used words that were difficult to understand. Perceiving providers use difficult words and lower general self-efficacy were associated with having SLE-related damage among African American but not White patients. CONCLUSION: African Americans had more severe SLE and perceived more hurried communication with providers. Both worse communication and lower self-efficacy were associated with having SLE-related damage among African American but not White patients, suggesting that these factors should be investigated as potential interventions to reduce SLE racial disparities.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".