MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386631987 · doi:10.1177/09612033231202398

Risk factors of pulmonary arterial hypertension in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: A meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4386631987 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yuqi Liu, Cheng Zhen, Bowen Zha, Zhiyu Gong, Lang Ji, Lingling Wei

Bibliographic record

VenueLupus · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary hypertensionMeta-analysisCardiologyInternal medicineSystemic lupusIntensive care medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To determine the risk factors of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) related to systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) through systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Methods We undertook electronic search strategies using Medline via PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to April 11, 2023. Study selection and data extraction were performed by 2 authors independently. We made risk of bias judgments based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to estimate the overall effect sizes of potential risk factors for PAH in SLE patients. Univariate and multivariate meta-regression models were used to assess the independent effects of each risk factor on PAH. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted to explore potential sources of heterogeneity. Results A total of 19 articles were included in this meta-analysis, and the results showed that gender (female) [RR = 1.04, 95% CI (1.02, 1.06), p = .0001], interstitial lung disease [RR = 4.36, 95% CI (2.42, 7.85), p = .0001], alopecia [RR = 1.39, 95% CI (1.06, 1.83), p = .017], Raynaud’s phenomenon [RR = 1.83, 95% CI (1.41, 2.37), p = .0001], systemic hypertension [RR = 1.30, 95% CI (1.07, 1.58), p = .007], serositis [RR = 2.29, 95% CI (1.89, 2.77), p = .0001], pericardial effusion [RR = 3.33, 95% CI (2.20, 5.05), p = .0001], anti-RNP [RR = 1.86, 95% CI (1.19, 2.91), p = .006], anti-SSA [RR = 1.28, 95% CI (1.01, 1.62), p = .041], anti-SSB [RR = 1.38, 95% CI (1.19, 1.60), p = .0001], anti-U1RNP [RR = 1.58, 95% CI (1.07, 2.34), p = .023], thrombocytopenia [RR = 1.38, 95% CI (1.14, 1.68), p = .001], and current smokers [RR = 2.20, 95% CI (1.19, 4.06), p = .012] were all risk factors for PAH related to SLE. Conclusion PAH is a serious complication of SLE. Since prognosis of SLE patients after the occurrence of PAH is poor, routine examination should be conducted for SLE patients with PAH risk factors.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0240.068
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLupusSame topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207