Patient Journey Toward a Diagnosis of Light Chain Amyloidosis in a National Sample: Cross-Sectional Web-Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Systemic light chain (AL) amyloidosis is a rare and multisystem disease associated with increased morbidity and a poor prognosis. Delayed diagnoses are common due to the heterogeneity of the symptoms. However, real-world insights from Chinese patients with AL amyloidosis have not been investigated. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the journey to an AL amyloidosis diagnosis and to build an in-depth understanding of the diagnostic process from the perspective of both clinicians and patients to obtain a correct and timely diagnosis. METHODS: Publicly available disease-related content from social media platforms between January 2008 and April 2021 was searched. After performing data collection steps with a machine model, a series of disease-related posts were extracted. Natural language processing was used to identify the relevance of variables, followed by further manual evaluation and analysis. RESULTS: A total of 2204 valid posts related to AL amyloidosis were included in this study, of which 1968 were posted on haodf.com. Of these posts, 1284 were posted by men (median age 57, IQR 46-67 years); 1459 posts mentioned renal-related symptoms, followed by heart (n=833), liver (n=491), and stomach (n=368) symptoms. Furthermore, 1502 posts mentioned symptoms related to 2 or more organs. Symptoms for AL amyloidosis most frequently mentioned by suspected patients were nonspecific weakness (n=252), edema (n=196), hypertrophy (n=168), and swelling (n=140). Multiple physician visits were common, and nephrologists (n=265) and hematologists (n=214) were the most frequently visited specialists by suspected patients for initial consultation. Additionally, interhospital referrals were also commonly seen, centralizing in tertiary hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Chinese patients with AL amyloidosis experienced referrals during their journey toward accurate diagnosis. Increasing awareness of the disease and early referral to a specialized center with expertise may reduce delayed diagnosis and improve patient management.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".