RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COPING STRATEGIES AND DISEASE ACTIVITY, SEVERITY, AND TOTAL DAMAGE ACCRUAL IN SYSTEMIC LUPUS ERYTHEMATOSUS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PV050 / #831 Poster Topic: AS06 - Comorbidities Background/Purpose Previous studies have reported a higher prevalence of stress, anxiety, and depression in individuals with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE). However, no literature establishes a relationship between coping strategies and disease activity, severity, and cumulative damage in SLE. Methods Adult patients diagnosed with SLE were recruited during routine appointments and completed validated Portuguese translations of the BRIEF-COPE scale (assessing coping strategies for stressful events), the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Short-form Health Survey (SF-36v2). Clinical and laboratory disease features, as well as prior anxiety or depression diagnoses, were obtained from electronic medical records. Flares were defined according to the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SLEDAI) for the year preceding recruitment. Disease severity was assessed using the Lupus Severity Index (LSI): being 0 no severity and 10 the higher severity possible. Damage accrual was evaluated by the SLICC Damage Index (SDI). Results A total of 27 adults diagnosed with SLE were recruited. All participants met the ACR classification criteria, were in active follow-up, and had a mean LSI of 6.71 ± 1.69. Five (18.5%) experienced a flare in the previous year, and 10 (37.5%) presented cumulative damage. Analysis of global indicators from the BRIEF-COPE scale revealed that participants scored at the general population average for both problem-focused coping strategies and emotion-focused strategies, and below average for avoidance strategies. Their quality of life was lower than the general population average, both physically and mentally. Most participants with damage accrual exhibited adaptive coping strategies, particularly problem-focused (62.5% ± 16.03) and emotion-focused (63.5% ± 20.04) approaches. Among participants without a flare in the previous year, 35% engaged in avoidance strategies vs 19% of those who experienced a flare. Avoidance coping was inversely related to overall severity of SLE by LSI. Conclusions This is the first study using the BRIEF-COPE scale in adults with SLE to examine the relationship between coping strategies, disease activity, overall severity, and cumulative damage. Individuals living with SLE appear to exhibit above-average adaptive coping strategies, particularly those with damage accrual. Furthermore, our findings suggest that higher disease severity is associated with a lower adoption of maladaptive coping strategies.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".