MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412545020 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000043303

The impact of underlying RMD diagnosis on dignity landscape in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, and systemic sclerosis

2025· article· en· W4412545020 on OpenAlexaff
Virginia Pascual‐Ramos, Irazú Contreras-Yáñez, Maximiliano Cuevas-Montoya, Guillermo Arturo Guaracha-Basáñez, Mario García-Alanis, Oscar Rodríguez-Mayoral, Harvey Max Chochinov

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPatient Dignity and Privacy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaCancerCare Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRheumatoid arthritisQuality of life (healthcare)Internal medicineComorbidityConfidence intervalLogistic regressionPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distress related to perceived dignity (DPD) has been associated with mental health comorbidity, intensive treatment, and quality of life among patients with rheumatic diseases (RMDs). Within the RMD landscape, each individual diagnosis might present with distinctive sociodemographic characteristics, clinical phenotypes, and prognoses, all of which shape the patient's perceived dignity. The study utilized a cross-sectional design to determine the impact of underlying RMD diagnosis on DPD phenomenon and to compare DPD patterns in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and systemic sclerosis (SSc). Between February 2022 and April 2023, consecutive outpatients diagnosed with SLE, RA, and SSc completed the Mexican version of the Patient Dignity Inventory (PDI-Mx), along with additional patient-reported outcomes, which assessed participants perceived mental health, resilience, disease activity/severity, family functioning, fatigue, disability, quality of life, and satisfaction with medical care (SMC). A score of 54.5 or higher on the PDI-Mx was defined as indicating DPD. The attending rheumatologist determined the adequacy of control for the underlying RMD, comorbidities, and RMD diagnosis. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the factors associated with DPD. There were 137 patients (38.3%) with SLE, 124 (34.6%) with RA, and 97 (27.1%) with SSc. Among them, 88 patients (24.6%) had DPD. SSc diagnosis (exp ß, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] and P value: 0.291, 0.109-0.773, .013), World Health Organization Quality of Life-Brief questionnaire score (0.953, 0.926-0.980, .001 [irrespective of the specific dimension]), age (0.970, 0.942-0.999, .040), at least moderate severity for depression (9.512, 4.019-22.021, ≤.0001), 1-year previous hospitalization (2.673, 1.249-5.723, .011), Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index score (2.495, 1.409-4.420, .002), Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data score (1.084, 1.015-1.158, .016), and Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy score (1.023, 1.006-1.041, .009) were the factors associated with DPD, with an R² of 0.627. Overall, scores for PDI-Mx and its corresponding domains were similar across the 3 patient groups. Among patients with SLE, RA, and SSc, a diagnosis of SSc was found to be a protective factor against DPD. We also identified other protective factors, including age and quality of life. On the other hand, mental health comorbidity, disability, and more severe clinical phenotypes were associated with an increased risk of DPD.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.250 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicPatient Dignity and PrivacyFrench-language works237,207