Cognitive impairment in systemic lupus erythematosus is negatively related to social role participation and quality of life: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: At least 38% of patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) experience cognitive impairment (CI). Patients report CI impacts their health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and social role participation. OBJECTIVES: To synthesize and critically appraise the quantitative literature on the relationship of CI to HRQoL and social role participation in individuals with SLE. METHODS: Six electronic databases were searched in December 2018 and June 2020 by an information specialist. Two reviewers independently completed all screening phases and data extraction; a third reviewer resolved disagreements. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to critically appraise the quality of included studies. Data has been synthesized and analyzed descriptively to present evidence on the relationship of CI to HRQoL and social role participation. RESULTS: A total of 7182 references were identified and screened, with 14 articles included. Four of the included articles investigated the relationship between CI and HRQoL and all identified a negative relationship. Ten of the 14 studies investigated CI and social role participation, eight identified a negative relationship. There was heterogeneity of measures used between studies to examine CI, HRQoL, and social role participation. As such, results were interpreted descriptively and could not be pooled for meta-analysis. CONCLUSION: The presence of CI is negatively related to HRQoL and social role participation in patients with SLE. Healthcare professionals should be aware of this relationship so that it can be addressed in clinical practice. Further research, using consistent methods of quantifying CI, HRQoL and social role participation, is needed to enable data pooling.
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 | 0.008 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".