Interstitial Lung Disease for the Rheumatologist: Pearls and Insights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a potentially life-threatening complication of systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs). Its prevalence varies according to the underlying SARD, being highest in anti-synthetase and anti‑melanoma-differentiation-associated protein 5 (MDA5) syndromes, but affecting the greatest number of individuals in rheumatoid arthritis due to its higher overall frequency. Because ILD onset may precede, coincide with, or follow SARD diagnosis, rheumatologists may uncover an undiagnosed SARD during ILD evaluation or, conversely, detect ILD through screening of patients with established SARD. The spectrum of SARD-ILD is broad: some patients have mild, stable disease, others experience slowly progressive disease, and some deteriorate rapidly despite treatment, leading to oxygen dependence, lung transplantation, or death. Drug therapies, including immunosuppressive and anti‑fibrotic agents, can slow the progression of SARD-ILD. This article addresses three key clinical questions pertinent to rheumatologists. First, we explore clinical, serological, and morphological features that can aid in diagnosing SARD in patients with ILD, offering practical pearls. Second, we examine screening—covering who to screen, when, how, and at what frequency. Finally, we outline our approach to SARD-ILD 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".