MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411193213 · doi:10.1177/09612033251345184

Diagnostic overshadowing in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE): A qualitative study

2025· article· en· W4411193213 on OpenAlexaff
Rupert Harwood, Chris Wincup, David D’Cruz, Melanie Sloan

Bibliographic record

VenueLupus · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
FundersLUPUS UK
KeywordsMedicineSystemic lupus erythematosusDermatologySystemic lupusLupus erythematosusImmunologyInternal medicineDiseaseAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives SLE diagnostic journeys can be protracted, with negative impacts on long-term health. This study explored the role of diagnostic overshadowing (DOS) in delaying SLE diagnoses. Methods A qualitative analysis of 268 completed SLE patient surveys and 25 in-depth interviews purposively selected from the 2018-2021 Cambridge University Systemic Autoimmune Rheumatic Disease (SARD) studies. Results The majority of participants appear to have experienced DOS and there were indications that sustained DOS (S-DOS) may add years to some SLE diagnostic journeys. Symptom misattributions which contributed to S-DOS included: (1) “ Medical mystery ”, particularly when the clinician indicated that it was too expensive to keep investigating. (2) Negative misattributions (e.g. “nothing seriously wrong”), often due to a failure to connect multiple symptoms as possible indicators of an underlying condition. (3 ) Diagnostic roadblocks, including, in the case of some participants, a mental health, psychosomatic, ME/CFS or fibromyalgia (mis)diagnosis. (4) Moral misattributions, such as to “malingering”, which could undermine patient help-seeking and/or clinician help-giving. Conclusion Our data suggests that DOS may be an important factor in diagnostic delay in patients with 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLupusSame topicSystemic Lupus Erythematosus ResearchFrench-language works237,207