MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3096723874 · doi:10.1002/acr.24504

Prediction of Hospitalizations in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Using the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics Frailty Index

2020· article· en· W3096723874 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexandra Legge, Susan Kirkland, Kenneth Rockwood, Pantelis Andreou, Sang‐Cheol Bae, Caroline Gordon, Juanita Romero‐Díaz, Jorge Sánchez‐Guerrero, Daniel J. Wallace, Sasha Bernatsky, Ann E. Clarke, Joan T. Merrill, Ellen M. Ginzler, Paul R. Fortin, Dafna D. Gladman, Murray B. Urowitz, Ian N Bruce, David Isenberg, Anisur Rahman, Graciela S. Alarcón, Michelle Petri, Munther A. Khamashta, Mary Anne Dooley, Rosalind Ramsey‐Goldman, Susan Manzi, Asad Zoma, Cynthia Aranow, Meggan Mackay, Guillermo Ruiz‐Irastorza, S. Sam Lim, Murat İnanç, Ronald van Vollenhoven, Andreas Jönsen, Ola Nived, Manuel Ramos‐Casals, Diane L. Kamen, Kenneth Kalunian, Søren Jacobsen, Christine Peschken, Anca Askanase, John G. Hanly

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Care & Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaToronto Western HospitalDalhousie UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity of CalgaryMcGill UniversityQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreUniversité Laval
FundersInstitute of Musculoskeletal Health and ArthritisNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchVersus ArthritisWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeConfidence intervalSystemic lupus erythematosusCohortInternal medicineSystemic lupusDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) frailty index (FI) predicts mortality and damage accrual in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), but its association with hospitalizations has not been described. Our objective was to estimate the association of baseline SLICC-FI values with future hospitalizations in the SLICC inception cohort. METHODS: Baseline SLICC-FI scores were calculated. The number and duration of inpatient hospitalizations during follow-up were recorded. Negative binomial regression was used to estimate the association between baseline SLICC-FI values and the rate of hospitalizations per patient-year of follow-up. Linear regression was used to estimate the association of baseline SLICC-FI scores with the proportion of follow-up time spent in the hospital. Multivariable models were adjusted for relevant baseline characteristics. RESULTS: The 1,549 patients with SLE eligible for this analysis were mostly female (88.7%), with a mean ± SD age of 35.7 ± 13.3 years and a median disease duration of 1.2 years (interquartile range 0.9-1.5) at baseline. Mean ± SD baseline SLICC-FI was 0.17 ± 0.08. During mean ± SD follow-up of 7.2 ± 3.7 years, 614 patients (39.6%) experienced 1,570 hospitalizations. Higher baseline SLICC-FI values (per 0.05 increment) were associated with more frequent hospitalizations during follow-up, with an incidence rate ratio of 1.21 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.13-1.30) after adjustment for baseline age, sex, glucocorticoid use, immunosuppressive use, ethnicity/location, SLE Disease Activity Index 2000 score, SLICC/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index score, and disease duration. Among patients with ≥1 hospitalization, higher baseline SLICC-FI values predicted a greater proportion of follow-up time spent hospitalized (relative rate 1.09 [95% CI 1.02-1.16]). CONCLUSION: The SLICC-FI predicts future hospitalizations among incident SLE patients, further supporting the SLICC-FI as a valid health measure in SLE.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations25
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis Care & ResearchSame topicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus ResearchFrench-language works237,207